Yes, but if you kill two or more, it’s all good 👍
Batman could kill all killers in Gotham, last one being himself, then the number drops to 0
Checkmate, moral compass
Ethical people hate this one trick!
That would actually be a pretty cool premise. A hero who promises he will kill himself once all evil is defeated, as what he does although for good is evil itself. But people love him too much so they themselves become evil to keep him around.
I guess kinda like a incredible situation, but more dark because the protagonist just wants to die instead of raise a family.
But evil can never be truly deleted, can it? There will always be new villains. Can you ever truly call yourself done?
No, and that is why his promise is so clever, lol.
That’s actually a dope premise. Is there anything out there like that now?
Idk
One of the bad guys becomes a good guy not because it’s the right thing to do but because he genuinely wants to see if the hero will kill himself but the only way to promise to not be evil again is to be a good guy. Since the bad guy either has to die or stop fighting for the hero to be happy, but he wouldn’t really trust the bad guy if he just stopped. So although he occasionally messes up the bad guys is pretty good now
He could always, you know, just break their spine
So would the number of citizens in gotham. Apparently everyone is a killer in that city.
TIL Batman sucks at math.
Also it’s kinda stupid because it’s only true if you stop at the first killer.
No no, if you kill two killers you become a double killer and the count stays the same.
So by your logic… Would you become a triple killer by killing a double killer? Or a serial killer by killing a single serial killer? What about the trolley problem if the single guy is a serial killer then? I need answers
“Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god.” — Jean Rostand
Source: https://quotepark.com/quotes/1749668-jean-rostand-kill-one-man-and-you-are-a-murderer-kill-million/
Due to the transitive property of murder, you have valid points.
But you always let the trolley kill the old person instead of the murderer; the murderer can stop murdering, the old person can only be stopped by killing them. In all other cases the murderer gets trolley’d.
By the additive property of killing, you’d be a triple killer if you killed a double. Serial killers get the title by killing people all in a row. If they’re not in a row it doesn’t count.
The trick to the trolley problem is to yank the brake, jackknife the trolley cars, and hit everyone. This would make you a septuple killer, and earn the ‘Badass Moves’ achievement.
Ok, but what if I drive a Time Trolley to run over my own grandpa before he met my own grandma and kill Antoni Gaudi?
I’m pretty sure this was an episode of Futurama, and you end up getting laid. Just don’t ask too many questions.
That only counts if your killings are non-consecutive.
If you kill two killers then the number of killers has been reduced by 1.
The number of killers is always offset by the number of people you kill minus 1. So the real mora is don’t stop at one, thanks Batman 😃
Apparently he’s bad at math.
Why is it Batman’s duty to forfeit his morals and kill the Joker and not on the state of New Jersey for their revolving door of crime in their penitentiaries like blackwater and appalling lack of proper facilities to deal with dangerous and deranged meta humans instead sticking them in a rotting facility made in the 20’s.
Hell why isn’t this on the federal government after so many years of chronic and sustained neglect. They have what amounts to a nightmare scenario for the department of defense and just let it sit like a festering wound.
Why do we blame a single crazy billionaire, instead of the horrendous circumstances surrounding them.
Yea, it’s always been weird to me that Batman alone is being judged for not using lethal force. If that were part of any consistent values, wouldn’t every person who has had chain of custody of Joker, or even proximity to him, be morally obligated to kill him?
If random cop that has had Joker in handcuffs, or random doctor who has been treating Joker, or even every other super hero on the planet hasn’t extra judiciallly executed Joker, why should Batman bear the obligation to do so?
I was about to make the argument that if batman killed the joker the only consequence for him would be his compromised morals, but if someone else killed the joker while he was in custody then they would at least lose their job and most likely go to jail and that’s not comparable. Then I remembered that if a cop killed him they’d just get paid leave before they were acquitted of the murder and worst case would have to get a job in a different city. So yeah ACAB.
Just like we don’t expect the police to be the executioner, and instead have a judge make the verdict. We shouldn’t expect Batman to do so either.
Because rather than spending some of his money to change things, he spends it to punch people
But if you’re already a killer and you kill a killer, the number of killers in the world is reduced by one.
Soooo, I should start killing now in case I find my self in a Batman-situation?
Obviously
Dexter Morgan is a better hero than Batman ever was
deleted by creator
As an old friend of mine once said “If he killed em the writers would have to invent new enemies continuously. With that excuse they can put them in the Asylum and reuse them for new stories whenever they want.”
The more efficient option is rarely the more entertaining option.
Sounds like something the Joker might say.
It does shortcut originality a fair bit. Why come up with a new guy with a new gimmick when they can just throw Condiment King out there.
Prob part of the reason Punisher isn’t that popular. A good rogues gallery makes for a good hero. No rogues and hes just some guy.
It’s funny that Punisher really isn’t all that popular but in the US his skull emblem in a Blue Lives Matter livery is an extremely popular automotive window decal.
deleted by creator
It actually goes way back to the 80s and 90s when Punisher comics took off. It wasn’t as common as you see today, but the Punisher skull was on lunchboxes and tee shirts and tattoos and rifle cases. We didn’t have social media back then, though, so the cops kept their shared psychotic fantasies about unrepentant murder well hidden.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
What’s funny is that, if the Punisher were real, he’d 86 every one of those corrupt cops.
The Punisher’s iconic story is about him executing his coworkers on the police force for killing his family. He’s the most directly anti-cop comic book character. But all the vets-turned-cops just remember how cool the skull looked ironed on to their gear in the military I guess.
Heaven forbid writers be forced to come up with something original or anything
Pretty much why I prefer manga. The convention for manga is creators come up with their own characters and stories rather then remixing preexisting ones. Of course there’s original stuff in the west, but people don’t talk about those nearly as much. There’s also some examples of Japanese characters getting passed about to different writers, but that’s also less common.
If you kill 1000 killers the number of killers in the world decreases by 999 though.
And if you kill a million killers you’re not a killer anymore so it goes down by a solid million.
Was just going to say if total number of killers was the only important metric, you could have one person kill the rest of the killers. Then the meta-killer could kill all other people, just in case there are undiscovered killers hiding amongst them.
deleted by creator
But the amount of serial killers goes up
Not if at least one of the killers was already a serial killer.
At last, the nights will be safe from Count Chocula.
Am I the only one who finds it reassuring that the well-armed ninja billionaire who lives out a childhood revenge fantasy every night has a set of rules he follows?
I tried to go back and watch the Dark Knight Batman movies because I remembered enjoying them when they first came out.
There’s an early scene where there is a Batman impersonator and he goes “what’s the difference between me and you” and Batman goes “I’m not wearing hockey pads”
It’s supposed to be a real zinger. As I watched it though the realization hit me that what he’s really saying is “because I have money so the rules don’t apply to me” and then I realized that that’s kinda the entire point of Batman. He’s a billionaire that’s decided he’s wealthy enough that silly things like laws don’t apply to him.
Really made me not enjoy the movie and I ended up turning it off.
I think the point is that he wasn’t an amateur and the guy was. He was trying to do a job and they got in his way.
Replace batman with a firefighter and give the guy a water pistol and it’s the same story.
I mean it’s not like you can major in Batman studies or go down to the Batman Trade School and become a professional Batman.
Batman is just as much an amateur as that guy is, he just has more expensive gear.
I mean professional in a skill sense. Batman is very damn good at what he does, and no one comes close.
Batman Trade School
Also known as the Robin Internship Program.
I think that’s why I like Spiderman so much. He’s a vigilante who genuinely struggles to make ends meet at times and has gone through so much that he arguably deserves to completely stop protecting people and yet, he continues anyway.
I like the idea of a Batman story where it’s slowly revealed that he’s the villain. There’d be his most sympathetic villains revealed to be people that are fighting the morally correct fight, while Batman is just fighting to maintain the status quo.
The sequel would have the Joker trying to undermine the public trust in the systems that maintain the status quo
I always think of Batman is a crazy person that he knows he’s a crazy person. Which is why he has to strictly follow rules he set for himself.
If Batman broke his rule against killing, within a few years people of Gotham would have to worry about getting killed by the Batman for jaywalking. Batman knows that he has the potential of going this way so he has to follow his rules to prevent that from happening.
I really like this interpretation
Yep.
The Punisher would have Gotham cleaned up in a week, including corrupt cops.
Remember, kids, guns and superheroes don’t mix!
They always have excuses in the comics. I think the latest one of “the Joker has a super Joker toxin in his heart that’s released when he dies to turn whomever kills him into an even worse Joker” to be quite forced.
By the way, the Batman Who Laughs really overstayed his welcome.
Is this real?
No more spoilers. Start from Dark Knight: Metal if you want to read the comics.
That’s just what happened in one universe though, right? Neither Batman nor Joker know about that, or did I misunderstood?
In the next series “The Batman Who Laughs”, they showed that the mainstream Joker also had this failsafe too and no spoilers because the plot kinda builds around that.
Ohh I see. Yeah that’s a bit too on the nose then.
What’s much more important is the number of victims! If you kill a killer you are reducing the total number of victims.
This is the greatest part about the latest movie, The Batman. At the beginning you do have the depressive rich boy obsessed with revenge, being brutal and cruel to criminals is sort of his point. But as the movie progresses he starts to shift to realize that he shouldn’t be pursuing revenge against the criminals, for it isn’t bringing him any resolution, but instead should be striving to save and protect the victims. The shift is dramatic, specially with the thematic use of Nirvana’s Something In The Way as musical background, and it’s paired in a holistic way with his public face. Bruce Wayne comes out of the shadows to become the philanthropic playboy. Another facade, but one that fulfills just as an important role, by pushing Gotham rich society to charity and financial aid work for the ones in need, that is of course rarely if ever depicted, because it’s not superhero work. But it is important because is the part of the rich boy actually using his fortune to enact positive change in the world that the superhero persona can’t, just like the superhero does things the regular person can’t, capturing crazy criminals and saving people from over-engineered elaborate terrorist ploys.
The hyperfixation of modern Batman writers on Joker and the weird homoerotic overtones that come with it has become tiresome. There are much better villains in Batmans rouge gallery than some crazy clown
While there are some awesome Batman villains, I agree.
None of them have the dynamic the Joker does. The Joker is like the complete opposite of Batman. Chaotic, maniac, big smile, kills without a second thought.
All the Joker tries to prove is that anyone, no matter how just they think they are, no matter how steadfast they believe themselves to be, are only a single bad day away from turning into a monster like him.
He wants to push Batman over the edge, because Batman is the biggest challenge in that regard. If he can bend Batman, he can bend anyone. So if he can get Batman to kill him, his point is proven.
deleted by creator
The rest of the rogue’s gallery does in fact have better dynamics with Batman than Joker does.
Joker’s some lame ass loser who views supervillainy as a career while literally everyone else in the rogue’s gallery has better, more interesting reasons to do what they do. Joker’s doing evil for the lulz schtick is boring as fuck. He’s nothing but a boring-ass two dimensional Gary Stu and I am tired of being quiet about it.
The only interesting Joker we’ve had in the past twenty years is the Joaquin Phoenix one.
Wow! Something smart in this thread! Bravo !
I think the reason they focus on it is because it’s really popular. I really enjoy all the stories where they have to fight each other but can’t finish it forever or where the joker gives up because he thinks that batman is gone. I think there’s a lot of room to explore what makes batman different from criminals using the joker and the strong parallels.
Mr Freeze comes to mind.
I never got how batman is so popular, he’s just a crazy rich person with the most plot armor of any superhero. Also he could pretty much fix Gotham with his money but he instead spends it on gadgets to beat up mentally ill people.
Bruce Wayne already is pouring in billions into Gotham social services. He is like the billionaire we want but never get in real life. Some things just aren’t solved with money in their universe.
Batman isn’t just some crazy rich person. He is the world greatest detective since issue #1. Better than even Sherlock.
He can not only stand his own next to power houses like Superman, but he also plays an extremely crucial part of the Justice League: the information gatherer.
To say it in gaming terms, Batman isn’t DPS or tank. He is support. And damn good at it.
That’s kinda what I mean as far as suspension of disbelief is, concerned: billions would fix any city unless you aren’t trying to fix anything and no matter how smart you are you won’t stand up to someone with actual superpowers without a metric ton of plot armor. Like a kryptonian, someone with the speed force or even just magic could vaporize batman with barely any effort.
Like the comics and other media where batman is up against just normal humans I can understand though still not my favourites but the ones where he’s against actual superpowers you usually get some bullshittery.
I’m no expert in comics by a long shot but that’s just been my impression when I did read some batman. The one where batman was actually a patient in arkham and all the villains were just doctors, guards and patients was my favourite though.
billions would fix any city
Tell that to Boston, which squandered 22 Billion dollars on a highway project disaster. Boston may have had a huge issue with corruption, but Gotham is literally cartoonishly corrupt and decrepit.
Yea, that’s what I’m implying, batman is either corrupt, stupid or unrealistic when it comes to helping Gotham with money.
I kinda like the depiction of him as an out of touch billionaire(The type that thinks bread costs 50 bucks or doesn’t know people pay for housing) that just builds orphanages or something but has no idea on how to actually fix issues, just believes he does. That would be quite realistic actually.
You just described why it’s popular, no?
It’s the American way
Why spend money fixing a problem when you can spend 5x money responding to it with violence
You don’t get why Batman is popular because you apparently have an Adam West-era perception of Batman
The Dark Knight fits that summation perfectly.
The Adam West Batman was the only good Batman.
Not if you kill multiple killers… Dumbass.
