Batman regularly kills innocent people due to negligence. He knows the gays he throws in prison are going to escape and kill people again, but he keeps doing it because of his autistic ideology.
It's like that one meth head whose pit bulls keep escaping and mauling neighborhood kids. He is being negligent in his responsibilities and indirectly causing harm.
Yes but Batman knows the police are negligent, yet continues to hand criminals to them, thus making Batman negligent. He could solve this whole thing by just cutting their heads off.
>He could solve this whole thing by just cutting their heads off.
Or perhaps that would cause others to rise up and start killing because of that. You don't know. If Batman, a supposed good guy, is willing to kill it could cause others who were hesitant to start doing so.
>Kill 100 henchmen of the evil villain >Finally arrive and defeat him >Sidekick: We did it! Let's give him what he deserves. Take his life and prevent him from ever hurting anyone again! >No, we mustn't kill him. That's wrong. He must go to prison where he will likely escape many times and continue running his criminal empire from prison anyway.
Batman's quote is in context of revenge. If you become the judge and the executioner by taking someone's life, there will always be those that kill in retaliation. They could be loved ones, colleagues, family, etc..
But I don't read Batman comics so I could be wrong.
Batman takes pleasure in dominating and bludgeoning his enemies. He captures them, knowing they will escape, so he can hunt them down and be the hero again. It's all a game he plays to take power over the guy that killed his parents. As long as he doesn't break the covenant with himself he still sees himself as good and therefore justified in his catharsis. Any explanation Bruce gives for his moral code is a post hoc justification.
only applies the first time you kill someone
yeah but then if you kill two killers there's now a double-killer in the world.
Didn't Punisher (in the late 90s crossover) or Red Hood make this exact point
Bamham's entire arc is realizing he was a moron with unchecked psychological issues.
Either killing is inherently wrong in all circumstances or it's not and it's ok to kill under certain circumstances
?t=568
So kill two killers and now you're making a difference. God damn Batman is stupid
>kill 10 mass murderers
>there's 9 fewer killers in the world
>dozens of innocent people are spared
>dozens of innocent people are spared
How do you know they are innocent? Perhaps they were also killers or would be killers.
ones capeshit and ones not so go figure
But if I kill three killers, there are two less.
>kill one hundred killers
Get fricked, bats!
Killing is inherently moral, it's only murder that is not.
wut right pic?
Batman never said that.
Batman regularly kills innocent people due to negligence. He knows the gays he throws in prison are going to escape and kill people again, but he keeps doing it because of his autistic ideology.
It's like that one meth head whose pit bulls keep escaping and mauling neighborhood kids. He is being negligent in his responsibilities and indirectly causing harm.
>He is being negligent in his responsibilities and indirectly causing harm.
You mean the police are being negligent for always letting them escape.
Yes but Batman knows the police are negligent, yet continues to hand criminals to them, thus making Batman negligent. He could solve this whole thing by just cutting their heads off.
>He could solve this whole thing by just cutting their heads off.
Or perhaps that would cause others to rise up and start killing because of that. You don't know. If Batman, a supposed good guy, is willing to kill it could cause others who were hesitant to start doing so.
The bad guys already kill people constantly, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
>Kill 100 henchmen of the evil villain
>Finally arrive and defeat him
>Sidekick: We did it! Let's give him what he deserves. Take his life and prevent him from ever hurting anyone again!
>No, we mustn't kill him. That's wrong. He must go to prison where he will likely escape many times and continue running his criminal empire from prison anyway.
>it's abotu sending a message
Batman's quote is in context of revenge. If you become the judge and the executioner by taking someone's life, there will always be those that kill in retaliation. They could be loved ones, colleagues, family, etc..
But I don't read Batman comics so I could be wrong.
>there will always be those that kill in retaliation. They could be loved ones, colleagues, family, etc..
What if I kill them all?
>nooooo this general statement is actually very specific. batman is not a moron!
literally you.
Neither are correct but Batman is the good guy, whoever is on he right is he antichrist.
>YOU KILLED A VILLAIN WHO'S MURDERED COUNTLESS PEOPLE INDISCRIMINATELY?! AHHHHH I'M GOING TO BREAK ALL YOUR BONES!!!!!
you should let people die - jonathan kent
>I don't freaking kill!
He killed Rasal Ghul
Then you just kill 2 killer.
Batman takes pleasure in dominating and bludgeoning his enemies. He captures them, knowing they will escape, so he can hunt them down and be the hero again. It's all a game he plays to take power over the guy that killed his parents. As long as he doesn't break the covenant with himself he still sees himself as good and therefore justified in his catharsis. Any explanation Bruce gives for his moral code is a post hoc justification.
if you are a transsexual and have a nice day you are an double hero