Current Events > To anyone who still thinks it's selfish for Batman to not kill joker

(+) Yeah! (+)

The Batman Who Laughs is your answer. He's a new character from an event in the comics where a bunch of evil Batmen from the darkest parts of the multiverse team up to cause trouble and the leader is The Batman Who Laughs. In his world he finally killed the joker and it ended up driving him insane and evil . So that's the answer. Batman can't kill Joker. In just about every story where it happens it always ends badly. But The Batman Who Laughs is the worst case

He murders his entire Bat Family and murders the Justice League and Superman's wife and son

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself
---

The argument that killing a mass murdering lunatic who cannot be stopped by any other means will automatically make you turn into a serial killer for shits and giggles has always been a dumb one
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*
---

Panthera posted...

The argument that killing a mass murdering lunatic who cannot be stopped by any other means will automatically make you turn into a serial killer for shits and giggles has always been a dumb one

Well in Justice League cartoon Lex kills Flash and then the League went crazy and either killed everyone or lobotomized everyone. So it's safe to say if something triggers them they will go crazy
---

I've never really bought into the idea that Batman wouldn't be able to stop killing if he did it once. I just have to accept that the Joker can't be killed because the character is too popular.
---

Panthera posted...

The argument that killing a mass murdering lunatic who cannot be stopped by any other means will automatically make you turn into a serial killer for shits and giggles has always been a dumb one

That's very much going to depend on the mental strength of the person who does it. Maybe Batman just isn't as mentally tough as he seems.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*

It's friday, beer is the only acceptable answer
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*

It's friday, beer is the only acceptable answer

It's already Saturday here.
---

Panthera posted...

The argument that killing a mass murdering lunatic who cannot be stopped by any other means will automatically make you turn into a serial killer for shits and giggles has always been a dumb one

Yeah this. It's one of the most annoying things about Batman.

Personally though I'm glad there's finally a bad Batman. Him being the moral God and most uncorrptable DC character who always wins was getting stale.

that batman went insane because the writers wanted him to. in reality killing a mass murderer makes you a hero
---

edededdy posted...

that batman went insane because the writers wanted him to. in reality killing a mass murderer makes you a hero

Becoming a hero and going insane are not mutually exclusive in the first place, though.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*

It's friday, beer is the only acceptable answer

It's already Saturday here.

beer is also acceptable on saturday
---

DarkTransient posted...

edededdy posted...

that batman went insane because the writers wanted him to. in reality killing a mass murderer makes you a hero

Becoming a hero and going insane are not mutually exclusive in the first place, though.

yeah but we all know that wouldnt make anyone insane
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*

It's friday, beer is the only acceptable answer

It's already Saturday here.

beer is also acceptable on saturday

No. Beer on Friday, cider on Saturday. What the hell kinda backwater county do you come from where you drink beer on Saturday?
---

No one says he has to kill him himself. Just have one of the anti-heroes do it. Or just build a single cell in some isolated part of space and leave him there.
---

The idea that killing a monster means you wouldn't be able to stop killing at all is pure comic book lunacy. It's just a poor justification to explain away a mass murderer coming back and committing mass murder again and again, time after time.

If, for some contrived reason there was a real Batman and a real Joker in real life, if Batman had killed the Joker he'd be able to sleep like a baby and society would call him a hero for it. Imagine a universe where Obama got vilified and couldn't stop himself from raking the entire planet over some coals just because he killed Osama, and that's what comic book writers insist is a logical reaction for killing a mass murderer.
---

TheSextMachine posted...

No one says he has to kill him himself. Just have one of the anti-heroes do it. Or just build a single cell in some isolated part of space and leave him there.

I've long been a fan of the idea of keeping Joker in a prison inside the batcave so that he can't take advantage of incompetent staff at Arkham. plus, there would be lots of interesting scenes with Joker talking to Batman in the cave and making jokes and mocking him. eventually he would escape still, but I think it would make a good story. Picture Batman trying to work at his computer and Joker's in the background in a cell making fun of him

A_Good_Boy posted...

The idea that killing a monster means you wouldn't be able to stop killing at all is pure comic book lunacy. It's just a poor justification to explain away a mass murderer coming back and committing mass murder again and again, time after time.

If, for some contrived reason there was a real Batman and a real Joker in real life, if Batman had killed the Joker he'd be able to sleep like a baby and society would call him a hero for it. Imagine a universe where Obama got vilified and couldn't stop himself from raking the entire planet over some coals just because he killed Osama, and that's what comic book writers insist is a logical reaction for killing a mass murderer.

All of this

Veggeta X posted...

Panthera posted...

The argument that killing a mass murdering lunatic who cannot be stopped by any other means will automatically make you turn into a serial killer for shits and giggles has always been a dumb one

Well in Justice League cartoon Lex kills Flash and then the League went crazy and either killed everyone or lobotomized everyone. So it's safe to say if something triggers them they will go crazy

This is why I enjoyed the story line in Injustice.

After Joker kills Lois, he vigorously taunts Superman, who ends up killing him and deciding that he needs to rule mankind, rather than serve them to save them. It's a pretty damn good story that pretty much keeps you hooked the entire time, especially when you see who joins which camp.
---

Yes, if Batman took a life, he'd go on to murder everyone. And if anyone was better than Batman at anything, the world would explode.

That's why Batman has to be exactly the way he is: the universe would explode if not for shitty writing. :v

A_Good_Boy posted...

The idea that killing a monster means you wouldn't be able to stop killing at all is pure comic book lunacy. It's just a poor justification to explain away a mass murderer coming back and committing mass murder again and again, time after time.

If, for some contrived reason there was a real Batman and a real Joker in real life, if Batman had killed the Joker he'd be able to sleep like a baby and society would call him a hero for it. Imagine a universe where Obama got vilified and couldn't stop himself from raking the entire planet over some coals just because he killed Osama, and that's what comic book writers insist is a logical reaction for killing a mass murderer.

Batman is a psychopath himself so that's why he thinks if he kills he won't be able to stop.

He doesn't view the world in a conventional way. Yeah, if someone normal were to kill somebody in self defense then maybe it wouldn't drive them over...

But like I said, Batman is a psycho himself who could easily get away with murder if he wanted

Authentic_fan posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

The idea that killing a monster means you wouldn't be able to stop killing at all is pure comic book lunacy. It's just a poor justification to explain away a mass murderer coming back and committing mass murder again and again, time after time.

If, for some contrived reason there was a real Batman and a real Joker in real life, if Batman had killed the Joker he'd be able to sleep like a baby and society would call him a hero for it. Imagine a universe where Obama got vilified and couldn't stop himself from raking the entire planet over some coals just because he killed Osama, and that's what comic book writers insist is a logical reaction for killing a mass murderer.

Batman is a psychopath himself so that's why he thinks if he kills he won't be able to stop.

He doesn't view the world in a conventional way. Yeah, if someone normal were to kill somebody in self defense then maybe it wouldn't drive them over...

But like I said, Batman is a psycho himself who could easily get away with murder if he wanted

this to be honest. I love Batman, but yes, he is actually crazy. that's why he is the way he is. his parent's murder broke his mind and he was never normal after that

Batman Who Laughs didn't kill everyone because of a slippery slope issue or whatever. He killed everyone because whatever disease made the Joker go insane infected Batman after Joker was killed.
---

iirc, Joker planned on Batman killing him, and a toxin/gas was released upon his death that transformed Batman into the Batman Who Laughs.

Batman didn't just snap after killing him.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Batman Who Laughs didn't kill everyone because of a slippery slope issue or whatever. He killed everyone because whatever disease made the Joker go insane infected Batman after Joker was killed.

boxington posted...

iirc, Joker planned on Batman killing him, and a toxin/gas was released upon his death that transformed Batman into the Batman Who Laughs.

Batman didn't just snap after killing him.

he also made him snap before the gas even.


he had him trapped and force him to watch as joker kept bringing in family sets of one child and 2 parents. and then each one he shot the parents in front of the child and then gave the child joker gas. after a bunch of these Batman managed to snap and use rage to escape and then kill Joker. he was probably already damaged before the gas touched him. that was just a final touch

Zikten posted...

The Batman Who Laughs is your answer. He's a new character from an event in the comics where a bunch of evil Batmen from the darkest parts of the multiverse team up to cause trouble and the leader is The Batman Who Laughs. In his world he finally killed the joker and it ended up driving him insane and evil . So that's the answer. Batman can't kill Joker. In just about every story where it happens it always ends badly. But The Batman Who Laughs is the worst case

He murders his entire Bat Family and murders the Justice League and Superman's wife and son

Wrong.
The Joker carried a nanotoxin, that rewrote Batmans brain into becoming more like the Joker.
Big difference.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Plus forcing someone to kill someone else and bear (bare?) that load for the rest of his life is kindof selfish in itself

beer*

It's friday, beer is the only acceptable answer

It's already Saturday here.

beer is also acceptable on saturday

No. Beer on Friday, cider on Saturday. What the hell kinda backwater county do you come from where you drink beer on Saturday?

In what forward-thinking utopia do you come from in which beer on saturday is unacceptable?
---

Zikten posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

Batman Who Laughs didn't kill everyone because of a slippery slope issue or whatever. He killed everyone because whatever disease made the Joker go insane infected Batman after Joker was killed.

boxington posted...

iirc, Joker planned on Batman killing him, and a toxin/gas was released upon his death that transformed Batman into the Batman Who Laughs.

Batman didn't just snap after killing him.

he also made him snap before the gas even.


he had him trapped and force him to watch as joker kept bringing in family sets of one child and 2 parents. and then each one he shot the parents in front of the child and then gave the child joker gas. after a bunch of these Batman managed to snap and use rage to escape and then kill Joker. he was probably already damaged before the gas touched him. that was just a final touch

tbf, Batman killing Joker in a (justified) rage is one thing, and Batman murdering others is another
---

Zikten posted...

Authentic_fan posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

The idea that killing a monster means you wouldn't be able to stop killing at all is pure comic book lunacy. It's just a poor justification to explain away a mass murderer coming back and committing mass murder again and again, time after time.

If, for some contrived reason there was a real Batman and a real Joker in real life, if Batman had killed the Joker he'd be able to sleep like a baby and society would call him a hero for it. Imagine a universe where Obama got vilified and couldn't stop himself from raking the entire planet over some coals just because he killed Osama, and that's what comic book writers insist is a logical reaction for killing a mass murderer.

Batman is a psychopath himself so that's why he thinks if he kills he won't be able to stop.

He doesn't view the world in a conventional way. Yeah, if someone normal were to kill somebody in self defense then maybe it wouldn't drive them over...

But like I said, Batman is a psycho himself who could easily get away with murder if he wanted

this to be honest. I love Batman, but yes, he is actually crazy. that's why he is the way he is. his parent's murder broke his mind and he was never normal after that

I get that. Batman is a dude that pledged his life to being a psycho that runs around in a mask because his parents got killed. I just think it's a huge stretch to assume that him killing a mass murderer would make him a mass murderer in turn. It's just ridiculous, and comic book writers always seem to delve into campy reasoning to explain away the in-universe explanation for the real life editorial justification for Batman not putting down Joker.

I think it was probably Crisis on 2 Earths or a Justice League episode where they had Batman debating an alternate reality version of himself arguing the merits of killing the Joker and even his writers couldn't come up with a convincing argument for not killing the Joker.
---

I get that. Batman is a dude that pledged his life to being a psycho that runs around in a mask because his parents got killed. I just think it's a huge stretch to assume that him killing a mass murderer would make him a mass murderer in turn. It's just ridiculous, and comic book writers always seem to delve into campy reasoning to explain away the in-universe explanation for the real life editorial justification for Batman not putting down Joker.

I think it was probably Crisis on 2 Earths or a Justice League episode where they had Batman debating an alternate reality version of himself arguing the merits of killing the Joker and even his writers couldn't come up with a convincing argument for not killing the Joker.

This is exactly why I'm tired of Batman always being the incorruptible moral God that he is. Even Superman has gone bad a few times.

Batman lives in this world where he is constantly suspicious of everybody and even afraid of what he himself would be capable of doing if he allowed himself to kill someone. He's fully aware that there's a chance that he might like it and then become an unstoppable serial killer.

I wish DC would actually explore this further. It would do a lot for Batman as a character to show this weaker, vulnerable side of himself. A story arc where he actually fucking loses it and starts killing only to be stopped by Superman for a change.

It would be fresh and awesome but they could also tell the story as to why he feels that way. It would make it feel a lot less like a lazy excuse to keep The Joker alive.

Here's the thing. If Batman kills the Joker, why would he not kill the Scarecrow, or Black Mask, or Mr. Zsaz (assuming he's not already dead) etc.? I get that he wouldn't necessarily become an uncontrollable killing machine, but what limiting principle would exist whereby killing the Joker is justified and permissible, but killing half of his other rogues gallery (who are serial killers) isn't?
---

Also, I like that Batman doesn't kill. Turning him into a killer, even temporarily, seems predictable and easy. The fact that, irrespective of how much it frustrates readers or other characters, Batman refuses to kill, is actually a distinctive and admirable aspect of the character. He's not the Punisher, he's not Wolverine. You have to understand, Batman doesn't have the authority to kill. He's already a vigilante; being non-homicidal is perhaps the only thing that gives him a shred of legitimacy.
---

Donomark posted...

Here's the thing. If Batman kills the Joker, why would he not kill the Scarecrow, or Black Mask, or Mr. Zsaz (assuming he's not already dead) etc.? I get that he wouldn't necessarily become an uncontrollable killing machine, but what limiting principle would exist whereby killing the Joker is justified and permissible, but killing half of his other rogues gallery (who are serial killers) isn't?

I don't see anything wrong with that either. Batman positions himself to be in conflict with terrorists and mass murderers. He'd have an excuse for not killing them if his conflicts with them would actually make their sprees stop, but they don't. The most Batman ever seems to do is prepare to put them away once they've escaped and committed more murders. It's just ridiculous that his writers insist on how intelligent he is while at the same time insisting that he's incapable of telling the difference between Hitler and a dude that ticks the wrong box on his taxes.
---

yea and it's the only thing that keeps the GCPD off his ass. the only reason Gordon is able to work with Batman is cause Batman never kills. if he did kill, Gordon would be forced to go after him

A_Good_Boy posted...

Donomark posted...

Here's the thing. If Batman kills the Joker, why would he not kill the Scarecrow, or Black Mask, or Mr. Zsaz (assuming he's not already dead) etc.? I get that he wouldn't necessarily become an uncontrollable killing machine, but what limiting principle would exist whereby killing the Joker is justified and permissible, but killing half of his other rogues gallery (who are serial killers) isn't?

I don't see anything wrong with that either. Batman positions himself to be in conflict with terrorists and mass murderers. He'd have an excuse for not killing them if his conflicts with them would actually make their sprees stop, but they don't. The most Batman ever seems to do is prepare to put them away once they've escaped and committed more murders. It's just ridiculous that his writers insist on how intelligent he is while at the same time insisting that he's incapable of telling the difference between Hitler and a dude that ticks the wrong box on his taxes.

Okay, well that would make him a murderer. He has no authority whatsoever to determine who is and is not worthy of life. He is not a judge. He has not been elected by the people to pass such judgment. Batman is not a murderer, and I prefer him that way.
---

Zikten posted...

yea and it's the only thing that keeps the GCPD off his ass. the only reason Gordon is able to work with Batman is cause Batman never kills. if he did kill, Gordon would be forced to go after him

Yup. Technically, they should go after him already, but openly allowing him to commit murder would be totally indefensible.
---

Donomark posted...

Also, I like that Batman doesn't kill. Turning him into a killer, even temporarily, seems predictable and easy. The fact that, irrespective of how much it frustrates readers or other characters, Batman refuses to kill, is actually a distinctive and admirable aspect of the character. He's not the Punisher, he's not Wolverine. You have to understand, Batman doesn't have the authority to kill. He's already a vigilante; being non-homicidal is perhaps the only thing that gives him a shred of legitimacy.

I like that he doesn't kill as well, but the Batman comics are all about mental illnesses and shit.

The fact that Batman, as a completely... bat shit crazy person, is completely incorruptible in a universe full of super criminals is stale to me.

He doesn't necessarily have to have an arc where he goes on a killing spree but for God's sake can he make ONE immoral decision?

Do people forget how Batman has killed so many fucking people? Like sure he hasnt decapitated anyone, but his actions have directly resulted in so many deaths with him aware of it. Remember Owlman? Fuckin executed in cold blood. Too tired to find more examples right now zzzz
---

Authentic_fan posted...

Donomark posted...

Also, I like that Batman doesn't kill. Turning him into a killer, even temporarily, seems predictable and easy. The fact that, irrespective of how much it frustrates readers or other characters, Batman refuses to kill, is actually a distinctive and admirable aspect of the character. He's not the Punisher, he's not Wolverine. You have to understand, Batman doesn't have the authority to kill. He's already a vigilante; being non-homicidal is perhaps the only thing that gives him a shred of legitimacy.

I like that he doesn't kill as well, but the Batman comics are all about mental illnesses and shit.

The fact that Batman, as a completely... bat shit crazy person, is completely incorruptible in a universe full of super criminals is stale to me.

He doesn't necessarily have to have an arc where he goes on a killing spree but for God's sake can he make ONE immoral decision?

He does make immoral decisions. There are comics where Batman is a sadistic torturer. Also, isn't the existence of Robin arguably immoral? Certainly, it's highly questionable.
---

Chicken posted...

Do people forget how Batman has killed so many fucking people? Like sure he hasnt decapitated anyone, but his actions have directly resulted in so many deaths with him aware of it. Remember Owlman? Fuckin executed in cold blood. Too tired to find more examples right now zzzz

they didn't die but during New 52 where was an arc in Batman and Robin about a bunch of criminals who got beaten into having disabilities by Batman, teaming up to try to kill him. it was all a bunch of guys with permanent problems after encountering him, out for revenge cause he ruined their lives. it showed that even if he doesn't kill, he can leave a permanent impact on people that he beats up.

I mean it's not like Batman just pushes then on the ground and runs away.

They go to jail, most of the time. They eventually escape. If you want them dead, why isn't the justice system executing them? Batman's job is solving crime, not solving a completely broken justice system that keeps letting terrorists live.
---

Joker kills. Batman doesn't. Simple.
---

Yea why can't Batman be like James Bond and just snap the Joker's neck, beat the Penguin to death, or cut the Riddler's throat.
---

Because those characters still got good stories to tell.
---

Donomark posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Donomark posted...

Here's the thing. If Batman kills the Joker, why would he not kill the Scarecrow, or Black Mask, or Mr. Zsaz (assuming he's not already dead) etc.? I get that he wouldn't necessarily become an uncontrollable killing machine, but what limiting principle would exist whereby killing the Joker is justified and permissible, but killing half of his other rogues gallery (who are serial killers) isn't?

I don't see anything wrong with that either. Batman positions himself to be in conflict with terrorists and mass murderers. He'd have an excuse for not killing them if his conflicts with them would actually make their sprees stop, but they don't. The most Batman ever seems to do is prepare to put them away once they've escaped and committed more murders. It's just ridiculous that his writers insist on how intelligent he is while at the same time insisting that he's incapable of telling the difference between Hitler and a dude that ticks the wrong box on his taxes.

Okay, well that would make him a murderer. He has no authority whatsoever to determine who is and is not worthy of life. He is not a judge. He has not been elected by the people to pass such judgment. Batman is not a murderer, and I prefer him that way.

This has always been a pretty poor argument to me to. If dude cared about respecting laws so much then he wouldn't be a vigilante that routinely goes to war with the cops. At best he'd be a lobbyist or someone that contracts his surveillance tech out to the government. But he doesn't do any of that. He goes out at night in a mask and fucks people up, commits dozens of crimes each night, and refuses to place himself under any oversight that he can't easily undermine. Even in joining the Justice League he only does it only so that he can be the final authority over right and wrong, where anyone that disagrees with him can be subject to one of his contingency plans. If he was gonna blink when confronted with the reality of being judge, jury, and executioner; he shouldn't pride himself on how effective he is at being judge and jury.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

I mean it's not like Batman just pushes then on the ground and runs away.

They go to jail, most of the time. They eventually escape. If you want them dead, why isn't the justice system executing them? Batman's job is solving crime, not solving a completely broken justice system that keeps letting terrorists live.

Batman's job is running his corporation. If he didn't want a bunch of bystanders from a different reality critiquing his methods then he should keep his ass at home.
---

Batman not killing Joker because he's hanging on to his own sanity by a thread is a perfectly fine explanation. The question that doesn't have a good answer is "why has no Gotham PD cop ever just capped him during an arrest or during transport?" I can buy Batman having the willpower to stop himself, but every single officer with a gun in a city constantly terrorized by him? Yea, no. At least one of them would have had a family member killed.
---

Batman's reasons for not killing Joker are just selfish. His world would be far better off without joker - heck, he could let anyone else do it or just make sure he gets the death penalty from the justice system he seems desperate to use instead.
---