Neither. Bruce has no in-universe excuse to not kill the Joker. If he can't put down someone who is very obviously evil and irredeemable because he thinks it'll make HIM evil and irredeemable then he shouldn't pretend to be a superhero in the first place. But Jason fricked up making it all about him and Bruce instead of just killing the Joker himself when he easily could have.
"I am mentally unwell, if I kill this guy, actively and willingly with full intent, I will not be able to stop and uncross that line because I do not have the mental stability and ability to pull myself back once I go over."
But aside from the fact that he imprinted daddy issues and diet-versions of his own problems on all of his kids, meaning any of them breaking ranks demonstrably have a pretty predictable "explosive" phase immediately afterwards where they haven't learned to set their own boundaries or to moderate anything in a healthy manner because of their complicated bullshit, there's no real reason any of the Batfamily should *never* kill beyond their own moral decision or respect for Bruce and what they think the cowl represents.
Which is what usually pisses Jason off more than anything, he sees most of the rest of the Batfamily as doing it not because they've made a moral decision of their own, but because they're just aping Bruce and following orders who's argument is fundamentally moral cruft around his own mental illness rather than a strong moral stance in and of itself.
A good example of it though is Cass, who is actively making the decision to never intentionally kill someone for her own reasons, ones made from Trauma, yeah, but Bruce is ultimately enabling her, not making the decision for her.
Jason himself managed to stabilize out of his blowout "frick you dad where are the brakes" phase and while he still kills frickers he doesn't go out of his way to murder every petty criminal and can moderate for the sake of working with others because he's since had time to develop boundaries and a more complex moral stance of his own, but like he never actually stopped killing motherfrickers he just stopped making sure to pause after every fight and force feed each bleeding crook the barrel of one of his guns and Bruce doesn't throw a shitfit anymore since Jason's shown he CAN go back from the edge.
>"I am mentally unwell..."
Bruce, if that is true, AND I DON'T THINK IT IS, then you need to give me the keys to your bat-shaped car, your bat-shaped plane and all of your other bat-shaped weaponry and you need to do it right now.
Bruce is legitimately mentally unwell and that's been consistent for decades, but it's in a pretty specific way [hyperparanoid control freak and not mentally equipped to take a life actively] and the writers only care about it when they can use it to either A: make Bruce look "cool" or B: when they can use it to bullshit him out of a moral dilemma or personal failing as an excuse. It's never allowed to be addressed how it negatively impacts him as a person or as Batman.
The closest we've ever gotten is Batman Beyond where half the series was just showing how Batman without any of Bruce's mental hangups from either being Bruce or being raised by Bruce or having him dominate your entire formative years and be able to beat you down/pull the plug on you whenever, resulted in someone who legitimately surpassed him as Batman by almost every metric and even that had to be done quietly and without bringing overt attention to it outside of the movie and they could only do it in an animated series that took place in the future.
The story is way more moronic when you realize that the Joker always comes back no matter if he dies, so batman killing him wouldn't make a difference. If this was a comic where characters stayed dead, then it would be different. Also Joker got away from dying by being the ambassador of Iran. Knowing how stupid comics can get, even Jason killing him would do jack shit
if joker always comes back after dying, then batman would be 100% justified in not killing him, since either alive or dead would be the same for the joker, but killing him would violate batman's morals
Batman's universe is stupid. Being headshot at point blank won't kill you. Bathing in acid won't kill you. Only the plot kill in Batman. And it can ressurect you anyway.
if joker always comes back after dying, then batman would be 100% justified in not killing him, since either alive or dead would be the same for the joker, but killing him would violate batman's morals
>but killing him would violate batman's morals
The moral of someone who covered up the murder of a 14yo to keep flexing in his spandex?
I want to see a Batman story which is just Batman putting a bullet in the frickers brain, everyone confirms he's the one true Joker and he is totally fricking dead, and Bruce just says "Great. Now everyone shut the frick up and lets see how long this lasts." before the status quo magics him back up somehow.
Why is it Batman's responsibility to kill the Joker?
Why don't the courts just stop giving him an insanity pass and fry him?
Why don't the Gotham cops shoot the Joker for 'trying to escape'?
Why doesn't an orderly at Arkham poison his food?
Why doesn't Zatanna, Dr. Fate or Constantine zap him into a coma or Hell itself?
Why doesn't one of the Green Lanterns put him in space prison?
Why doesn't Harley kill him?
Why doesn't Ivy kill him?
Why doesn't Lex kill him?
Why doesn't Wild Dog kill him?
Why doesn't Peacemaker kill him?
Why doesn't Manhunter Kate kill him?
If you want to just bag on Batman or how capeshit is locked into a cycle of status quo? You can find better reasons than recycling this issue.
My main problem is every time they pull up this stupid bullcrap "if I kill him, I'll be no better than him!" logic. It just makes him sound like a pathetic sociopath instead of an actual hero.
Giving Batman a hard no kill rule as an in universe thing really was a major mistake in the long run. At best he should have an aversion to it from a practical standpoint to maintain relationships with the GCPD and the public, but with just how murderous they’ve decided to make Batman’s villains the hard no kill rule just makes Batman absurd as a counter to them.
I would kill Joker
Not because Joker has committed murder
But because he will eventually whatever confinement we put him in and do more murder. Probably a lot more
Thing is, planning to kill Joker solely because I can't stop him is, in a way,an admission of weakness
And Batman sure as shit would never admit to being weak
I find it funny that people hinge entire moral arguments upon Jason asking Batman "Why is the Joker not the exception to your no-kill rule" when the entire point of his angry rant at Batman was that he was roundabout asking why his adoptive dad didn't love him enough to break his own moral code and rip the clown's head off.
Hood, hands down. The shit that goes down with this where Bruce legitimately considers killing Jason to save the Joker is one of the most infamous BatSchizo episodes in his history.
At this point, choosing to not kill Joker is a selfish choice that Bruce is only making because he doesn't want to do the intellectual and emotional work to separate the concepts of murder and killing. If you think those two words mean the same thing, you're not worth speaking to on this subject.
What drives Batman to fight every night in a war he can't win? A principle. That moral values can be held, can be maintained, and right can win at the end without ever breaking those values. To Bruce, the act of murder is the ultimate wrong-doing. There's no future for the killed, whether good or bad. If he's to save the soul of Gotham City, he has to save it's corrupt as well. Heal them via the system's in place, systems he funds with charitable events as Bruce Wayne. If he kills Joker, if he makes an 'exception', then he's admitting that his values aren't enough. That Gotham can only be changed by playing by Gotham's rules. The rules of cruelty, abhorrence and death. Batman could do it. He wants to do it, he's said so multiple times. But the moment he does, he loses the argument, and with that argument goes the very 'point' of Batman. Why continue after that, if he's lost the moral fight? You can entirely call this egocentric, call it madness, Joker certainly does. But it's how Batman operates. It's who he is. It's the boy who emerged from losing everything and who decided that no one else should ever lose anyone again. Red Hood is fighting from the position of a personal vendetta. For him, that's always been the reason to fight. His own will to make evil suffer. So of course he can't understand why Bruce didn't avenge him. Bruce is fighting for something bigger than himself, but for Red Hood? The 'self' is the only thing worth fighting for.
Yeah outside of that one time in Injustice, Batman somehow is able to make enough of a mental distinction that most aliens, robots, some mutants, demons, and most other magical creatures get an exemption from his "No Kill rule" psychosis.
Depends how hard you're willing to buy in to that
>Batman is LE CRAAAAAAAZZY
thing. For any reasonable person, Red Hood is 100% right
>who was in the right?
The people who stopped reading this shit.
The speech is good but that 'thumbs down' panel on the middle is so fricking goofy
Jason is a villain moron he is evil
Neither. Bruce has no in-universe excuse to not kill the Joker. If he can't put down someone who is very obviously evil and irredeemable because he thinks it'll make HIM evil and irredeemable then he shouldn't pretend to be a superhero in the first place. But Jason fricked up making it all about him and Bruce instead of just killing the Joker himself when he easily could have.
What's your favorite non excuse for Batman not to kill the Joker? Mine has to be "I can't kill the Joker because someone worse will come along"
Bruce has one legitimate argument for it.
"I am mentally unwell, if I kill this guy, actively and willingly with full intent, I will not be able to stop and uncross that line because I do not have the mental stability and ability to pull myself back once I go over."
But aside from the fact that he imprinted daddy issues and diet-versions of his own problems on all of his kids, meaning any of them breaking ranks demonstrably have a pretty predictable "explosive" phase immediately afterwards where they haven't learned to set their own boundaries or to moderate anything in a healthy manner because of their complicated bullshit, there's no real reason any of the Batfamily should *never* kill beyond their own moral decision or respect for Bruce and what they think the cowl represents.
Which is what usually pisses Jason off more than anything, he sees most of the rest of the Batfamily as doing it not because they've made a moral decision of their own, but because they're just aping Bruce and following orders who's argument is fundamentally moral cruft around his own mental illness rather than a strong moral stance in and of itself.
A good example of it though is Cass, who is actively making the decision to never intentionally kill someone for her own reasons, ones made from Trauma, yeah, but Bruce is ultimately enabling her, not making the decision for her.
Jason himself managed to stabilize out of his blowout "frick you dad where are the brakes" phase and while he still kills frickers he doesn't go out of his way to murder every petty criminal and can moderate for the sake of working with others because he's since had time to develop boundaries and a more complex moral stance of his own, but like he never actually stopped killing motherfrickers he just stopped making sure to pause after every fight and force feed each bleeding crook the barrel of one of his guns and Bruce doesn't throw a shitfit anymore since Jason's shown he CAN go back from the edge.
>"I am mentally unwell..."
Bruce, if that is true, AND I DON'T THINK IT IS, then you need to give me the keys to your bat-shaped car, your bat-shaped plane and all of your other bat-shaped weaponry and you need to do it right now.
Bruce is legitimately mentally unwell and that's been consistent for decades, but it's in a pretty specific way [hyperparanoid control freak and not mentally equipped to take a life actively] and the writers only care about it when they can use it to either A: make Bruce look "cool" or B: when they can use it to bullshit him out of a moral dilemma or personal failing as an excuse. It's never allowed to be addressed how it negatively impacts him as a person or as Batman.
The closest we've ever gotten is Batman Beyond where half the series was just showing how Batman without any of Bruce's mental hangups from either being Bruce or being raised by Bruce or having him dominate your entire formative years and be able to beat you down/pull the plug on you whenever, resulted in someone who legitimately surpassed him as Batman by almost every metric and even that had to be done quietly and without bringing overt attention to it outside of the movie and they could only do it in an animated series that took place in the future.
>Bruce is legitimately mentally unwell
Sure, but he's also very intelligent, motivated and has access to the greatest psychological minds on Earth.
When did Batman get so gay for Joker?
Batman is the hero, Jason is the villain, a murderer, a moron who decapitates people and tried to kill two Robins. Who do you think is right?
>muh hero
The people who stopped reading this shit and are not taking Batman seriously.
your opinion is worthless
Cry harder.
youre an butthole who doesnt like any comics, so why are you even opining?
cause youre a fricking loser and troll. heres the fricking (YOU) you never got from either of your dads, gay.
The story is way more moronic when you realize that the Joker always comes back no matter if he dies, so batman killing him wouldn't make a difference. If this was a comic where characters stayed dead, then it would be different. Also Joker got away from dying by being the ambassador of Iran. Knowing how stupid comics can get, even Jason killing him would do jack shit
if joker always comes back after dying, then batman would be 100% justified in not killing him, since either alive or dead would be the same for the joker, but killing him would violate batman's morals
Batman's universe is stupid. Being headshot at point blank won't kill you. Bathing in acid won't kill you. Only the plot kill in Batman. And it can ressurect you anyway.
>but killing him would violate batman's morals
The moral of someone who covered up the murder of a 14yo to keep flexing in his spandex?
>The moral of someone who covered up the murder of a 14yo to keep flexing in his spandex?
yes
I want to see a Batman story which is just Batman putting a bullet in the frickers brain, everyone confirms he's the one true Joker and he is totally fricking dead, and Bruce just says "Great. Now everyone shut the frick up and lets see how long this lasts." before the status quo magics him back up somehow.
Batman
I don't like when they build stories around meta issues. This example in particular Bruce put Joker in a deathtrap. We all know why Joker doesn't die
Why is it Batman's responsibility to kill the Joker?
Why don't the courts just stop giving him an insanity pass and fry him?
Why don't the Gotham cops shoot the Joker for 'trying to escape'?
Why doesn't an orderly at Arkham poison his food?
Why doesn't Zatanna, Dr. Fate or Constantine zap him into a coma or Hell itself?
Why doesn't one of the Green Lanterns put him in space prison?
Why doesn't Harley kill him?
Why doesn't Ivy kill him?
Why doesn't Lex kill him?
Why doesn't Wild Dog kill him?
Why doesn't Peacemaker kill him?
Why doesn't Manhunter Kate kill him?
If you want to just bag on Batman or how capeshit is locked into a cycle of status quo? You can find better reasons than recycling this issue.
Batman would hunt them down and imprison them if they dared to lay a finger on Joker
Joker is actually bullshitting here tho.
For the record: Nightwing killed him
My main problem is every time they pull up this stupid bullcrap "if I kill him, I'll be no better than him!" logic. It just makes him sound like a pathetic sociopath instead of an actual hero.
>NOOOOOOOOO I CAN'T KILL THIS MASS MURDERER WHO ALSO KILLED YOU
>I'll slit your throat though lol
Batgays explain
It's the equivalent of when a single parent chooses their hot new SO over their own kids
I know that feeling.
This is embarrassing. I can't believe they approved it.
Its been said a million times, but the animated version did this way better
Giving Batman a hard no kill rule as an in universe thing really was a major mistake in the long run. At best he should have an aversion to it from a practical standpoint to maintain relationships with the GCPD and the public, but with just how murderous they’ve decided to make Batman’s villains the hard no kill rule just makes Batman absurd as a counter to them.
I would kill Joker
Not because Joker has committed murder
But because he will eventually whatever confinement we put him in and do more murder. Probably a lot more
Thing is, planning to kill Joker solely because I can't stop him is, in a way,an admission of weakness
And Batman sure as shit would never admit to being weak
I find it funny that people hinge entire moral arguments upon Jason asking Batman "Why is the Joker not the exception to your no-kill rule" when the entire point of his angry rant at Batman was that he was roundabout asking why his adoptive dad didn't love him enough to break his own moral code and rip the clown's head off.
Would he do this for Damian?
That's a good question. He did go through hell and back to resurrect him. Something he never did for Jason, and he even brings it up during the event.
Remembering that Jason had the chance to kill the Joker, but the Joker convinced him to kill himself.
Hood, hands down. The shit that goes down with this where Bruce legitimately considers killing Jason to save the Joker is one of the most infamous BatSchizo episodes in his history.
Jason.
At this point, choosing to not kill Joker is a selfish choice that Bruce is only making because he doesn't want to do the intellectual and emotional work to separate the concepts of murder and killing. If you think those two words mean the same thing, you're not worth speaking to on this subject.
What drives Batman to fight every night in a war he can't win? A principle. That moral values can be held, can be maintained, and right can win at the end without ever breaking those values. To Bruce, the act of murder is the ultimate wrong-doing. There's no future for the killed, whether good or bad. If he's to save the soul of Gotham City, he has to save it's corrupt as well. Heal them via the system's in place, systems he funds with charitable events as Bruce Wayne. If he kills Joker, if he makes an 'exception', then he's admitting that his values aren't enough. That Gotham can only be changed by playing by Gotham's rules. The rules of cruelty, abhorrence and death. Batman could do it. He wants to do it, he's said so multiple times. But the moment he does, he loses the argument, and with that argument goes the very 'point' of Batman. Why continue after that, if he's lost the moral fight? You can entirely call this egocentric, call it madness, Joker certainly does. But it's how Batman operates. It's who he is. It's the boy who emerged from losing everything and who decided that no one else should ever lose anyone again. Red Hood is fighting from the position of a personal vendetta. For him, that's always been the reason to fight. His own will to make evil suffer. So of course he can't understand why Bruce didn't avenge him. Bruce is fighting for something bigger than himself, but for Red Hood? The 'self' is the only thing worth fighting for.
You can't heal someone with cancer without killing the cancer.
>Bruce "I don't consider them people" Wayne
Yeah outside of that one time in Injustice, Batman somehow is able to make enough of a mental distinction that most aliens, robots, some mutants, demons, and most other magical creatures get an exemption from his "No Kill rule" psychosis.