The thing is, cops have no problem using lethal force on dangerous criminals. They don't do any fancy "shoot the gun out of their hand" stuff, they just try to kill them. Hell, sometimes they shoot a guy 30 times just for looking like he might be dangerous. In the real world, once you've got your gun up to someone's head, your life is pretty much forfeit.
Haven't Batman and Spidey always had the motto that if for all their powers and abilities, if they can't be anymore effective then a gun, then why bother?
Bloods End on
0
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited August 2007
It's the problem with static settings. When you have something that is going to just keep on running, having characters reguarley resort to lethal measures means it's going to be hard to keep long standing villains: look at the Authority, do they have any adversaries who put in active apperances for more than one arc?
After existing for some many years, and becoming so iconic, there's no real way to do away with characters like Batman or the Joker. That's why killing the Joker is such a popular thing to do in Elseworlds titles, because with a character that intertwined with the mythology, it's a heavy, meaningful event, but to do that in the regular series would be removing one of the oldest and best known villains from the story, and honestly, no matter how thoroughly you killed him, how long would it be before the inevitable return to life?
Haven't Batman and Spidey always had the motto that if for all their powers and abilities, if they can't be anymore effective then a gun, then why bother?
Which does nothing to address the question: X keeps on killing people. The only sure way to stop X is by killing him. By not killing X when you had the chance, after his next massacre, whose got the blood on their hands?
The thing is, cops have no problem using lethal force on dangerous criminals. They don't do any fancy "shoot the gun out of their hand" stuff, they just try to kill them. Hell, sometimes they shoot a guy 30 times just for looking like he might be dangerous. In the real world, once you've got your gun up to someone's head, your life is pretty much forfeit.
Cops are a part of the law.
This is the fundamental issue: every single "superhero" we're talking about (except for the ones who are explicitly governmentally employed) are vigilantes. They're criminals, breaking the laws in every state (and, in fact, every first world nation on the planet) against vigilantism.
Now, we may think they're morally in the right for doing so (and that's not the debate we're in here), but that doesn't change the fact that they're breaking the laws to do so.
Cops, on the other hand, are not only not violating the law by wielding/using lethal force in their jobs, but in fact they're required to do so by the selfsame law.
It's that simple. A cop doesn't violate the law by employing lethal force in an appropriate situations (in almost every American jurisdiction, this means either in pursuit of a violent felon, in situations where an innocent person is in imminent danger of grievous bodily harm or death, or a few other similar situations). They have the legal right to employ that lethal force.
Vigilantes, on the other hand, have no such right. While normal citizens have the legal right (in the US) to use force to defend 3rd-parties, generally they have a reduced right to employ that force (especially lethal force) and they remain much more responsible for the consequences (e.g. mistaken killings) than a person is when they defend themselves.
The thing is, cops have no problem using lethal force on dangerous criminals. They don't do any fancy "shoot the gun out of their hand" stuff, they just try to kill them. Hell, sometimes they shoot a guy 30 times just for looking like he might be dangerous. In the real world, once you've got your gun up to someone's head, your life is pretty much forfeit.
Yes, well when you're partially invulnerable, or can think the gun out of the crook's hand, the stakes are a little different.
Look at Judge Dredd, theyre always stuck to showing flashback stories every once in a while as everyone of his villains doesnt live for another issue (besides Judge death and co)
Which does nothing to address the question: X keeps on killing people. The only sure way to stop X is by killing him. By not killing X when you had the chance, after his next massacre, whose got the blood on their hands?
Well, first off, death in comics is rarely as permanent as death in reality, especially to big name villans.
So killing any given villan brings you that much closer to being one, and in the end, may be for nothing.
Additionally, by simply apprehending the villan then submitting them to authority (the cops), the responsibility for anything the villan does after that, given that they are insane and therefore "not" responsible for their own actions, lies with the judge and jury and prosecution.
What it comes down to is the conflict between the "moral" ends justifying "immoral" means and an "immoral" end being justified by "moral" means.
I mean, sure, there is a line you don't cross. You never kill.
Nothing in the book say's that Peter can't break Kingpin's arm so badly that he will never be able to use it properly again. And just have him say, simply, "If you ever even look at my family again, i'll do worse".
That's basically what All Star Batman's been doing, right? He doesn't just knock thugs out, he breaks them in ways they'll never entirely heal from.
Yeah, actually. I mean, as sadistic as it is, it's frightengly effective. It polarizes the way the villian is going to treat you in future encounters.
A. He's not doing it ever again.
B. He gets pissed off at you personally and tries his darndest to get back at you.
Either way, it takes civilians out of the way, for the most part. And since villians eventually come back after you eventually anyway, might as well hardcode a weakness into their body(Or make a new one). It's a line Pete can cross(Only with Kingpin), and come back from.
Or, if we'd rather not have Spidey kill someone.
"I said I'd never kill you, Fisk. I won't take that back."
"*Snikt*But his friends never made that promise, bub."
I'm sold.
Hell, I'd buy two.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Unfortunately, we already know what happens to the kingpin, because this is all happening before he gets kicked out of the U.S.
...which is why I think it came across to me that JSM had been straighjacketed just a little.
*quick visual of JMS in a straightjacket* Heh heh...
*ahem* Anyway, gotta say I think the whole he-did-it-to-scare-Kingpin-into-paying-Aunt-May's-hospital-bills is way more in character than any of the stuff I suggested, so I'm going to go ahead an turn my coat and go with that explanation.
Desktop Hippie on
0
143999Tellin' yanot askin' ya, not pleadin' with yaRegistered Userregular
Unfortunately, we already know what happens to the kingpin, because this is all happening before he gets kicked out of the U.S.
...which is why I think it came across to me that JSM had been straighjacketed just a little.
*quick visual of JMS in a straightjacket* Heh heh...
*ahem* Anyway, gotta say I think the whole he-did-it-to-scare-Kingpin-into-paying-Aunt-May's-hospital-bills is way more in character than any of the stuff I suggested, so I'm going to go ahead an turn my coat and go with that explanation.
Fuck scaring the Kingpin into paying the bills. I want to see Parker somehow convince the Hulk to scare Stark into doing it.
Unfortunately, we already know what happens to the kingpin, because this is all happening before he gets kicked out of the U.S.
...which is why I think it came across to me that JSM had been straighjacketed just a little.
*quick visual of JMS in a straightjacket* Heh heh...
*ahem* Anyway, gotta say I think the whole he-did-it-to-scare-Kingpin-into-paying-Aunt-May's-hospital-bills is way more in character than any of the stuff I suggested, so I'm going to go ahead an turn my coat and go with that explanation.
Fuck scaring the Kingpin into paying the bills. I want to see Parker somehow convince the Hulk to scare Stark into doing it.
How about Parker fess up that it's his fault for being a fucking idiot and revealing his ID to the public
Algertman on
0
143999Tellin' yanot askin' ya, not pleadin' with yaRegistered Userregular
Unfortunately, we already know what happens to the kingpin, because this is all happening before he gets kicked out of the U.S.
...which is why I think it came across to me that JSM had been straighjacketed just a little.
*quick visual of JMS in a straightjacket* Heh heh...
*ahem* Anyway, gotta say I think the whole he-did-it-to-scare-Kingpin-into-paying-Aunt-May's-hospital-bills is way more in character than any of the stuff I suggested, so I'm going to go ahead an turn my coat and go with that explanation.
Fuck scaring the Kingpin into paying the bills. I want to see Parker somehow convince the Hulk to scare Stark into doing it.
How about Parker fess up that it's his fault for being a fucking idiot and revealing his ID to the public
You didn't stick to the "somebody beating something out of someone else" format, so no.
Posts
You know why guys like Batman don't kill?
It'd be a waste of a damn rogues gallery.
PSN: OrneryRooster
Haven't Batman and Spidey always had the motto that if for all their powers and abilities, if they can't be anymore effective then a gun, then why bother?
After existing for some many years, and becoming so iconic, there's no real way to do away with characters like Batman or the Joker. That's why killing the Joker is such a popular thing to do in Elseworlds titles, because with a character that intertwined with the mythology, it's a heavy, meaningful event, but to do that in the regular series would be removing one of the oldest and best known villains from the story, and honestly, no matter how thoroughly you killed him, how long would it be before the inevitable return to life?
Which does nothing to address the question: X keeps on killing people. The only sure way to stop X is by killing him. By not killing X when you had the chance, after his next massacre, whose got the blood on their hands?
Cops are a part of the law.
This is the fundamental issue: every single "superhero" we're talking about (except for the ones who are explicitly governmentally employed) are vigilantes. They're criminals, breaking the laws in every state (and, in fact, every first world nation on the planet) against vigilantism.
Now, we may think they're morally in the right for doing so (and that's not the debate we're in here), but that doesn't change the fact that they're breaking the laws to do so.
Cops, on the other hand, are not only not violating the law by wielding/using lethal force in their jobs, but in fact they're required to do so by the selfsame law.
It's that simple. A cop doesn't violate the law by employing lethal force in an appropriate situations (in almost every American jurisdiction, this means either in pursuit of a violent felon, in situations where an innocent person is in imminent danger of grievous bodily harm or death, or a few other similar situations). They have the legal right to employ that lethal force.
Vigilantes, on the other hand, have no such right. While normal citizens have the legal right (in the US) to use force to defend 3rd-parties, generally they have a reduced right to employ that force (especially lethal force) and they remain much more responsible for the consequences (e.g. mistaken killings) than a person is when they defend themselves.
Yep.
Look at Judge Dredd, theyre always stuck to showing flashback stories every once in a while as everyone of his villains doesnt live for another issue (besides Judge death and co)
My digital art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=8168
My pen and paper art! http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=7462
Well, first off, death in comics is rarely as permanent as death in reality, especially to big name villans.
So killing any given villan brings you that much closer to being one, and in the end, may be for nothing.
Additionally, by simply apprehending the villan then submitting them to authority (the cops), the responsibility for anything the villan does after that, given that they are insane and therefore "not" responsible for their own actions, lies with the judge and jury and prosecution.
What it comes down to is the conflict between the "moral" ends justifying "immoral" means and an "immoral" end being justified by "moral" means.
I mean, sure, there is a line you don't cross. You never kill.
Nothing in the book say's that Peter can't break Kingpin's arm so badly that he will never be able to use it properly again. And just have him say, simply, "If you ever even look at my family again, i'll do worse".
Eat glass, lawman!
Yeah, actually. I mean, as sadistic as it is, it's frightengly effective. It polarizes the way the villian is going to treat you in future encounters.
A. He's not doing it ever again.
B. He gets pissed off at you personally and tries his darndest to get back at you.
Either way, it takes civilians out of the way, for the most part. And since villians eventually come back after you eventually anyway, might as well hardcode a weakness into their body(Or make a new one). It's a line Pete can cross(Only with Kingpin), and come back from.
I'm sold.
Hell, I'd buy two.
...which is why I think it came across to me that JSM had been straighjacketed just a little.
*quick visual of JMS in a straightjacket* Heh heh...
*ahem* Anyway, gotta say I think the whole he-did-it-to-scare-Kingpin-into-paying-Aunt-May's-hospital-bills is way more in character than any of the stuff I suggested, so I'm going to go ahead an turn my coat and go with that explanation.
Fuck scaring the Kingpin into paying the bills. I want to see Parker somehow convince the Hulk to scare Stark into doing it.
How about Parker fess up that it's his fault for being a fucking idiot and revealing his ID to the public
You didn't stick to the "somebody beating something out of someone else" format, so no.