Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
It's also what an officer of the law is supposed to do in the same situation. You don't just let suspects die because it's convenient.
Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
It's also what an officer of the law is supposed to do in the same situation. You don't just let suspects die because it's convenient.
Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
It's also what an officer of the law is supposed to do in the same situation. You don't just let suspects die because it's convenient.
An officer of the law also follows due process.
Granted. The fact is that Batman is a criminal.
That doesn't make him a de facto murderer. He thinks of himself as a public servant, and public servants don't go around around killing people. If the public wanted that, they'd have a process set up for it.
Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
It's also what an officer of the law is supposed to do in the same situation. You don't just let suspects die because it's convenient.
An officer of the law also follows due process.
Granted. The fact is that Batman is a criminal.
That doesn't make him a de facto murderer. He thinks of himself as a public servant, and public servants don't go around around killing people. If the public wanted that, they'd have a process set up for it.
Good thing we said kill and not murder.
It's not killing with malicious intent when you're stopping someone from killing hundreds, if not thousands of people.
Batman doesn't just capture him, though, he actively saves his life if the situation warrants it--you know, Joker does something to fall off a building and Batman does his swoop/catch/grapple combo or strings him up by the foot. Which, you know, he doesn't have to do. It's just weird.
It's also what an officer of the law is supposed to do in the same situation. You don't just let suspects die because it's convenient.
An officer of the law also follows due process.
Granted. The fact is that Batman is a criminal.
That doesn't make him a de facto murderer. He thinks of himself as a public servant, and public servants don't go around around killing people. If the public wanted that, they'd have a process set up for it.
Good thing we said kill and not murder.
It's not killing with malicious intent when you're stopping someone from killing hundreds, if not thousands of people.
But if the society he thinks he's serving thought it was best to kill the Joker, they would have done it already.
That's the fundamental issue I think we're having here.
In Batman's worldview, he's another kind of cop. Not a soldier, and certainly not the hangman.
And it's been written by dozens, if not hundreds, of people. I understand this, but you're saying not one decent writer could find the gumption to kill off the Joker? Shit, for all I know they have and some other jacktard just comes along and revives him somehow, or reveals he never truly died. Meh.
And it's been written by dozens, if not hundreds, of people. I understand this, but you're saying not one decent writer could find the gumption to kill off the Joker? Shit, for all I know they have and some other jacktard just comes along and revives him somehow, or reveals he never truly died. Meh.
...Well, yeah. What did you think would happen, they'd let some random writer off one of the most iconic characters in comic book history permanently? They won't even let D-listers stay dead! Anyway, the Cardboard Prison is just a necessary element of suspension of disbelief you have to accept with comic books. Even if they didn't kill the Joker off, you know that in a semi-realistic situation, they'd have hauled his ass to federal prison sometime around escape attempt #2. Or hell, they could get Superman to build a supervillain jail on the moon, whatever. But popular supervillains can't go away forever for the sake of narrative and maintaining fan interest.
EmperorSeth on
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
And it's been written by dozens, if not hundreds, of people. I understand this, but you're saying not one decent writer could find the gumption to kill off the Joker? Shit, for all I know they have and some other jacktard just comes along and revives him somehow, or reveals he never truly died. Meh.
Killing the Joker would wreck a big part of Batman's character and wouldn't carry with it the impact you might get from killing certain other characters, since at this point everyone would just assume he's coming back sooner or later.
But if the society he thinks he's serving thought it was best to kill the Joker, they would have done it already.
That's the fundamental issue I think we're having here.
In Batman's worldview, he's another kind of cop. Not a soldier, and certainly not the hangman.
Oh please. At multiple points society decided they didn't want Batman and that didn't stop him either.
You can still be a servant without being wanted. Just ask any TSA employee.
So go along with what society wants unless his crazy self doesn't want to and he'd rather loose a serial killer on them rather than go against a poorly thought out moral code. Fantastic idea, that.
But if the society he thinks he's serving thought it was best to kill the Joker, they would have done it already.
That's the fundamental issue I think we're having here.
In Batman's worldview, he's another kind of cop. Not a soldier, and certainly not the hangman.
Oh please. At multiple points society decided they didn't want Batman and that didn't stop him either.
You can still be a servant without being wanted. Just ask any TSA employee.
So go along with what society wants unless his crazy self doesn't want to and he'd rather loose a serial killer on them rather than go against a poorly thought out moral code. Fantastic idea, that.
Insanity is kind of a big part of the character.
As is the Idealism vs Realism thing you're taking such issue with.
Batman is an excellent illustration of the main split in utilitarian ethics, which is based around the idea that an ethically good action is one that maximizes utility (many would add in "without infringing on anyone's liberty" but that's another debate entirely). But there's a conflict there: act utilitarianism holds that one should make the utility judgement or calculation ad hoc and in the moment with the available information, while rule utilitarianism holds that we create rules to make the calculation for us and follow the rules because they're usually the best thing to do. When you stop at a red light when there are no cars coming, it can be said that you're acting as a rule utilitarian.
Batman is a rule utilitarian, and the decision not to kill the Joker calls this stance into question. Separate from the questions of Batman's sanity, the slippery slope of "crossing the line," or the Joker "winning," I think there's an important ethical consideration: Is the utility of following his rule really greater than what would be gained by killing him?
Batman already undermines the state's monopoly on force, and depending on the season and the writer, the city of Gotham more or less supports him. They are making the opposite utilitarian judgement: to make an exception to the rules because it's useful, which is aided by the fact that he's not leaving bodies in his wake. If he kills, making that exception on his behalf becomes harder. So in a sense, the rule may be allowing him to continue his work- the state and the people may not accept him if he's a murderer. There's that consideration.
I love Batman because of the rule- so I do personally consider it an essential feature of the character. I love that the rule is always questionable, and might even be counter-productive or ill-conceived, depending on what ethical lens is used. I love that the character doesn't seem to make these considerations because he is afraid, among many other things, of breaking his rule. Everything comes down to fear.
Torso Boy on
0
Options
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
Which is why he was offered a yellow power ring.
Speaking of, who else thinks he should have taken at least one of the rings he was offered? Not necessarily to use on every day patrolling, but as an emergency back-up, for use against cosmic-level threats.
Speaking of, who else thinks he should have taken at least one of the rings he was offered? Not necessarily to use on every day patrolling, but as an emergency back-up, for use against cosmic-level threats.
I... don't think the ring works that way? I could be mistaken, and it is a cool idea, mind you, but I'm pretty sure it's use it or lose it.
Well being a Green Lantern means you are part of an organization. You answer to a group of beings who can assign you to a whole othr planet than the one you're born on, and you're expected to police your whole section of the universe, not just your home town. Not really Batman's style at all.
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
Also, Batman doesn't need powers or anything. He is a symbol. He stands for a man's (human's) ability of standing up to the injustice around him and make a difference.
No one embodies this better than Batman. If Superman saves the world, yeah you think it's awesome but you still know you can't do what he can because he has superpowers and you don't. But Batman is just a man. He is what you could be (theoretically). That makes the character so awesome. All of us could be Batman. None could be Superman.
So why didn't Batman take an offered green lantern ring? I don't read comics but everyone's seen this demotivational poster:
He's a vigilante. He'd chafe something fierce in a galactic police force just like he would in Gotham PD.
IIRC, when he got his hands on a green lantern ring it rejected him because he hasn't conquered his fear, instead he embraced it and used it to fight crime as a scary guy in a BDSM Batsuit. He was able to use it for a while, but in the end his persona wasn't compatible with the green lantern energy.
Later when he got his hands on a yellow ring, it rejected him because he had used the green ring earlier.
Of course, that could have been an elseworlds, or retconned out of existence. I honestly don't know how you comic book nerds keep track. Hell, I can barely keep track of SW Canon, and it only gets 3 or 4 new novels a year.
see317 on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
Why does a yellow ring reject someone who's used a green ring? Wasn't Sinestro originally a GL?
I'm just glad Scarecrow got to have a yellow ring for a while. Ever since the Sinestro Corps started up was like "they NEED to give him a yellow ring dammit!" and they finally did.
In reality Gotham would have instituted the death penalty after the first time the Joker escaped. Everyone in Batman's rogues gallery would probably be dead.
It would never even get that far with the Joker. A guy who kills a couple dozen cops is not making it into custody safely. Especially if we're talking about the Gotham PD. He would have been "shot while escaping" a long time ago.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Hell in reality that guy who was watching over him in The Dark Knight probably would have -shot him- and every officer in that building would testify that they heard no gunshot.
Wouldn't it be similar Mob cases though? Yeah a policeman could kill the Joker but does anyone want to single themselves out as the guy who will kill super villains? I bet that guy would have lasted 12 hours before some Joker goons or Scarecrow killed him in a very painful and public way. Hell we're taking about a town that's been corrupted worse than any real town in history. Half the force is crooked and the mob has run the city for decades.
Wouldn't it be similar Mob cases though? Yeah a policeman could kill the Joker but does anyone want to single themselves out as the guy who will kill super villains? I bet that guy would have lasted 12 hours before some Joker goons or Scarecrow killed him in a very painful and public way. Hell we're taking about a town that's been corrupted worse than any real town in history. Half the force is crooked and the mob has run the city for decades.
Oh, sure, but there are honest cops, and in Gotham, that borderline requires martyr types.
Sure, you know you're dead, but you're in a five mile radius of the Joker, you're probably dead already. Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
Wouldn't it be similar Mob cases though? Yeah a policeman could kill the Joker but does anyone want to single themselves out as the guy who will kill super villains? I bet that guy would have lasted 12 hours before some Joker goons or Scarecrow killed him in a very painful and public way. Hell we're taking about a town that's been corrupted worse than any real town in history. Half the force is crooked and the mob has run the city for decades.
Oh, sure, but there are honest cops, and in Gotham, that borderline requires martyr types.
Sure, you know you're dead, but you're in a five mile radius of the Joker, you're probably dead already. Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
But that's kind of the point. Police on Gotham typically only come in two flavors. Absolutely corrupt or completely uncorruptable, and the completely uncorruptable would likely eschew taking the law into their own hands like that.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
0
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
Harvey Bullock is a reformed cop who still has some of the twinges of someone who would shoot the Joker if he could (in the comics at the end of No Man's Land I am surprise no one took a shot at Joker for what he did)
TexiKen on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Harvey Bullock is a reformed cop who still has some of the twinges of someone who would shoot the Joker if he could (in the comics at the end of No Man's Land I am surprise no one took a shot at Joker for what he did)
So why didn't Batman take an offered green lantern ring? I don't read comics but everyone's seen this demotivational poster:
He's a vigilante. He'd chafe something fierce in a galactic police force just like he would in Gotham PD.
IIRC, when he got his hands on a green lantern ring it rejected him because he hasn't conquered his fear, instead he embraced it and used it to fight crime as a scary guy in a BDSM Batsuit. He was able to use it for a while, but in the end his persona wasn't compatible with the green lantern energy.
Later when he got his hands on a yellow ring, it rejected him because he had used the green ring earlier.
Of course, that could have been an elseworlds, or retconned out of existence. I honestly don't know how you comic book nerds keep track. Hell, I can barely keep track of SW Canon, and it only gets 3 or 4 new novels a year.
The main reason why it rejected him is because he had too much willpower, he wouldn't just give into the evil and fear the Sinestro Corps represents. Otherwise he never would've been able to wield the Green Lantern ring at all.
And it's still in continuity, though Geoff Johns has turned the entire thing into a stupid clusterfuck filled with way too many characters and endless, crappy stories. GLC and Emerald Warriors are a lot more focused books (set cast and story arcs) and are so much better than Johns' Green Lantern, it isn't funny.
Also, Batman doesn't need powers or anything. He is a symbol. He stands for a man's (human's) ability of standing up to the injustice around him and make a difference.
No one embodies this better than Batman. If Superman saves the world, yeah you think it's awesome but you still know you can't do what he can because he has superpowers and you don't. But Batman is just a man. He is what you could be (theoretically). That makes the character so awesome. All of us could be Batman. None could be Superman.
Superman is someone everyone should aspire to be. That's what makes him so awesome.
Yeah, I think a good elseworlds could be about the cop who killed the Joker. Because renny's right, I don't think that said cop would be able to survive once everyone knows that he's the guy who killed the Joker.
That is, he wouldn't survive unless the GPD suddenly went on an extrajudicial offensive. As Batman becomes more and more shocked at the violence going on, the cops off more and more supervillains until, say, Catwoman is killed with Batman as a witness.
Batman then goes to court to testify against the policeman who did it. Said policeman is sitting in his chair, smug as can be. The defense attorney steps up to question Batman
and shoots him.
And with that, Gotham goes back to being the way it was, without Batman, without supervillains, and with a corrupt as hell police force that's now patting itself on the back for being so corrupt.
That is one of the worst storyline ideas I've ever read.
Raynaga on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
I say comic books as a culture need to be remade. The idea of sweeping continuities and persistent villains and worlds is a conceit that leads to A) stupid things and whacky implausible things.
Comics should be condensed into short runs that tell complete stories - much like the Nolan Batman movies. Batman catches Joker, he escapes once or twice before Batman finds a final solution - like a concrete box half kilometre under ground (with ample food and supplies for 2 lifetimes - or something less lame and more creative and less cruel. More Bathumane if you will). Joker doesn't escape again and the Batman story comes to a close. Then, they start again with a new take/twist/style (which isn't radically different to what happens now, with all the different comic lines just greatly condensed or without a persistent continuity.)
Of course this is probably not economically viable and sort of swims against the tide so wouldn't work for a whole range of reasons.
Posts
That's what makes him not just another crazy vigilante.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
An officer of the law also follows due process.
That doesn't make him a de facto murderer. He thinks of himself as a public servant, and public servants don't go around around killing people. If the public wanted that, they'd have a process set up for it.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Good thing we said kill and not murder.
It's not killing with malicious intent when you're stopping someone from killing hundreds, if not thousands of people.
That's the fundamental issue I think we're having here.
In Batman's worldview, he's another kind of cop. Not a soldier, and certainly not the hangman.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Oh please. At multiple points society decided they didn't want Batman and that didn't stop him either.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
this way madness lies
Killing or not killing is a big part of that.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
...Well, yeah. What did you think would happen, they'd let some random writer off one of the most iconic characters in comic book history permanently? They won't even let D-listers stay dead! Anyway, the Cardboard Prison is just a necessary element of suspension of disbelief you have to accept with comic books. Even if they didn't kill the Joker off, you know that in a semi-realistic situation, they'd have hauled his ass to federal prison sometime around escape attempt #2. Or hell, they could get Superman to build a supervillain jail on the moon, whatever. But popular supervillains can't go away forever for the sake of narrative and maintaining fan interest.
Killing the Joker would wreck a big part of Batman's character and wouldn't carry with it the impact you might get from killing certain other characters, since at this point everyone would just assume he's coming back sooner or later.
So go along with what society wants unless his crazy self doesn't want to and he'd rather loose a serial killer on them rather than go against a poorly thought out moral code. Fantastic idea, that.
As is the Idealism vs Realism thing you're taking such issue with.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Batman is a rule utilitarian, and the decision not to kill the Joker calls this stance into question. Separate from the questions of Batman's sanity, the slippery slope of "crossing the line," or the Joker "winning," I think there's an important ethical consideration: Is the utility of following his rule really greater than what would be gained by killing him?
Batman already undermines the state's monopoly on force, and depending on the season and the writer, the city of Gotham more or less supports him. They are making the opposite utilitarian judgement: to make an exception to the rules because it's useful, which is aided by the fact that he's not leaving bodies in his wake. If he kills, making that exception on his behalf becomes harder. So in a sense, the rule may be allowing him to continue his work- the state and the people may not accept him if he's a murderer. There's that consideration.
I love Batman because of the rule- so I do personally consider it an essential feature of the character. I love that the rule is always questionable, and might even be counter-productive or ill-conceived, depending on what ethical lens is used. I love that the character doesn't seem to make these considerations because he is afraid, among many other things, of breaking his rule. Everything comes down to fear.
Speaking of, who else thinks he should have taken at least one of the rings he was offered? Not necessarily to use on every day patrolling, but as an emergency back-up, for use against cosmic-level threats.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
What with all the "Batman is either unrealistic or an idiot" talk.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I... don't think the ring works that way? I could be mistaken, and it is a cool idea, mind you, but I'm pretty sure it's use it or lose it.
And well, that seems like a great idea to me.
He's a vigilante. He'd chafe something fierce in a galactic police force just like he would in Gotham PD.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
No one embodies this better than Batman. If Superman saves the world, yeah you think it's awesome but you still know you can't do what he can because he has superpowers and you don't. But Batman is just a man. He is what you could be (theoretically). That makes the character so awesome. All of us could be Batman. None could be Superman.
IIRC, when he got his hands on a green lantern ring it rejected him because he hasn't conquered his fear, instead he embraced it and used it to fight crime as a scary guy in a BDSM Batsuit. He was able to use it for a while, but in the end his persona wasn't compatible with the green lantern energy.
Later when he got his hands on a yellow ring, it rejected him because he had used the green ring earlier.
Of course, that could have been an elseworlds, or retconned out of existence. I honestly don't know how you comic book nerds keep track. Hell, I can barely keep track of SW Canon, and it only gets 3 or 4 new novels a year.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
Rigorous Scholarship
Oh, sure, but there are honest cops, and in Gotham, that borderline requires martyr types.
Sure, you know you're dead, but you're in a five mile radius of the Joker, you're probably dead already. Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
Why I fear the ocean.
But that's kind of the point. Police on Gotham typically only come in two flavors. Absolutely corrupt or completely uncorruptable, and the completely uncorruptable would likely eschew taking the law into their own hands like that.
Well, Gordon took a shot.
The main reason why it rejected him is because he had too much willpower, he wouldn't just give into the evil and fear the Sinestro Corps represents. Otherwise he never would've been able to wield the Green Lantern ring at all.
And it's still in continuity, though Geoff Johns has turned the entire thing into a stupid clusterfuck filled with way too many characters and endless, crappy stories. GLC and Emerald Warriors are a lot more focused books (set cast and story arcs) and are so much better than Johns' Green Lantern, it isn't funny.
Superman is someone everyone should aspire to be. That's what makes him so awesome.
That is, he wouldn't survive unless the GPD suddenly went on an extrajudicial offensive. As Batman becomes more and more shocked at the violence going on, the cops off more and more supervillains until, say, Catwoman is killed with Batman as a witness.
Batman then goes to court to testify against the policeman who did it. Said policeman is sitting in his chair, smug as can be. The defense attorney steps up to question Batman
and shoots him.
And with that, Gotham goes back to being the way it was, without Batman, without supervillains, and with a corrupt as hell police force that's now patting itself on the back for being so corrupt.
Comics should be condensed into short runs that tell complete stories - much like the Nolan Batman movies. Batman catches Joker, he escapes once or twice before Batman finds a final solution - like a concrete box half kilometre under ground (with ample food and supplies for 2 lifetimes - or something less lame and more creative and less cruel. More Bathumane if you will). Joker doesn't escape again and the Batman story comes to a close. Then, they start again with a new take/twist/style (which isn't radically different to what happens now, with all the different comic lines just greatly condensed or without a persistent continuity.)
Of course this is probably not economically viable and sort of swims against the tide so wouldn't work for a whole range of reasons.