Robin had a point - Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010) Discussion

You're right, Batman should go the Dexter route.

Its time to play.

reply

There've been various media that reference that Batman keeps a 'no kill' moral code due to his feeling that if he kills one villain, it will snowball into him going on to kill more and more. So it's more of a personal choice than his feeling the scumbags he faces are undeserving of death. I suppose it depends on who is writing the character.

Now I personally felt that Batman, even if he did kill (which he actually did back in the 30s), would not go after innocents or petty criminals or those who were not a threat. It would be interesting to explore that concept in an elseworlds comic, perhaps.

reply

[–] Neoblackdragon 10 years ago

Deep down Batman may feel that he can easily tip. He's an extremely violent guy. He may like killing and well he doesn't want to test it.

reply

[–] Kent_Kainer 8 years ago

That's what was kind of said in the Batman and Robin (2011) comic too. The Damian arc.
Bruce knows how hard it is for Damian to suppress his killing instinct. It's not just a trained trait. Bruce has it too deep down and he keeps it in check because he fears that once he goes that easy route he'd continue doing so in similar situations and may find excuses to do in less extreme situations too.

Doesn't mean that other ppl are like that too. Some surely may find back to their previous moral code.
Bruce fears he does not.

This movie doesn't reflect this part at all.

Jason actually showed that killing one criminal leads to the moral that it's okay to kill all criminals, if they are scum and deserve it.
He already failed, despite knowing how Batman thinks about it. Whether he understands it or not.

---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!

reply

[–] geearf 10 years ago

I think Injustice proved pretty much Batman's point.
It starts fairly small, but by the end most of the (regime) super heroes are fine killing *anyone* who gets in their way...

Also you compare Batman to cops, but there is a few major differences.
Cops are somehow kept in check, by their hierarchy, by laws, etc... If they kill someone they will need to explain themselves.
Who would keep superheroes in check? If they get out of control, who will be strong enough to stop them? So they keep themselves in control by not going that far (till they fail...)

reply

[–] jonaheroju 10 years ago

Woah. You have a good point on the cop angle. But I would like to ask about other heroes like wolverine, thor, wonder woman that are fine with taking lives if the situation calls for it, and successfully manage to "keep themselves in check" in your words.

reply

[–] OptimumTaurus 9 years ago

Batman has an unchecked dark side to him that, if he didn't create some line he won't cross, he fears he may not come back from. The heroes you mentioned don't have to internally worry that they can't come back after crossing a particular line. Wolverine knows he's "soiled" and would rather perform a kill himself than have more innocent team members kill. Thor's a boisterous Asgardian warrior, killing is just something he has to do sometimes, since he's, at heart, a warrior. Wonder Woman doesn't have the sort of internal trauma Batman has, and is much like Thor in that she's, at heart, a warrior. Heck, even Captain America (a soldier) has killed when totally necessary and he's considered a kind of moral center to a lot of other heroes.

Batman is not a warrior or soldier. Batman is an emotionally stunted manchild playing dress-up because he lost his mommy and daddy.

Batman worries that if he kills one time, he'd turn into The Punisher on a very bad day.

Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment. -Michael Corleone

reply

[–] waneagony 8 years ago

Batman is more badass than any of those mentioned. What guts does it take to go out and do what needs to be done when you are a mutant or a superhuman? Bruce Wane just puts his badass mode on on and instills fear in his foes (and the other "superheroes" when needed) ;)

“It has been my philosophy of life that difficulties vanish when faced boldly.”
― Isaac Asimov

reply

[–] gjoe13 9 years ago

sorry but wolverine does NOT keep himself in check. he would rather kill every opponent if perceived as a serious threat. the other two are warriors/soldiers. they were were trained to kill in battle.

reply

[–] OptimumTaurus 8 years ago

No, Wolverine doesn't keep himself in check, but he would rather perform the kill himself than, say, have Jubilee or some younger X-Man perform a kill. Wolverine is kind of that "bad teammate" that they keep around.

Kind of paraphrasing Jim Gordon in Dark Knight Rises, Wolverine is that guy who will plunge his hands into the filth (coldly kill people for whom no other solution will work) to keep the hands of his teammates clean.

Batman isn't that guy. Batman is a (very intelligent and resourceful) traumatized man-child playing dress up to atone for his parents dying in front of him.

Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment. -Michael Corleone

reply

[–] geearf 8 years ago

I don't know anything about Thor, and not that much about the others so I'll just go with the generic answer.
These guys may be able to keep themselves in check somehow, Batman is cautious, he doesn't want to take the chance, so he has rules in place to prevent the ultimate descent.

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JasonRebourne 9 years ago

Actually Injustice was caused by Batman being tool when Superman killed ONCE, being tool again when Superman killed parademons to SAVE THEM and then teaming up with HARLEY QUINN to fight anyone who gets in his way of protecting psychotic killers.

reply

[–] waneagony 8 years ago

Batman will stop the others at least ...

“It has been my philosophy of life that difficulties vanish when faced boldly.”
― Isaac Asimov

reply

[–] Phantom_Panther 8 years ago

I think Injustice proved pretty much Batman's point.
It starts fairly small, but by the end most of the (regime) super heroes are fine killing *anyone* who gets in their way...

Injustice isn't really proof of Batman's point so much as a repeating of straw man fallacies to prop up the no kill rule. It assumes that people are completely lacking in self awareness and incapable of telling the difference between killing as a last resort to defend one self or others and killing for the fun of it. This argument has always lacked nuance when it's talked about in superhero comics and related media. The argument isn't for Batman to kill any random person on the street but to realize the danger Joker and criminals like him represent and act accordingly. Wonder Woman when written right is a good example of how to do this right; she'll kill but only as a last resort and she won't take pride in it.

Also you compare Batman to cops, but there is a few major differences.
Cops are somehow kept in check, by their hierarchy, by laws, etc... If they kill someone they will need to explain themselves.
Who would keep superheroes in check? If they get out of control, who will be strong enough to stop them? So they keep themselves in control by not going that far (till they fail...)

So who keeps Batman in check everytime he commits assault, torture and B&E?

reply

[–] FridayOnElmStreet 9 years ago

I thought the same thing. Batman should have just killed the Joker.

reply

[–] PreachCaleb 9 years ago

Cops kill outlaws in real life and the general public understands and appreciates what they do.

Because those cops are authorized to do so should it become necessary. Batman has no such authority. He is a vigilante.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

[–] lsd-37648 9 years ago

Are we really rolling with this? Batman works directly with the Gotham Police. They give dude a license to go around and do what he does in the first place without getting arrested. I doubt the people of Gotham and the police force are gonna be up and arms if the Joker was found with his brains splattered everywhere.

We are talking about the guy that has all kinds of breaking and entering cases, assault and battery cases, withholding evidence, all kinds of illegal INTEL accessible through the Batcomputer, etc..., but pulling the trigger on real scumbags is taking it just one step too far now?

Even Two-Face offered a Devil's Advocate. The criminals Batman beats up were only just ACCUSED, defending themselves from him after his initial advance. None of those guys went to a court of law and were FORMALLY accused, tried or found of any wrongdoing. We as readers know its BS and the guys had it coming, but still it's a contradiction. He can't be above the law when the situation see's fit(Spying on people, withholding evidence, illegal INTEL, etc...) and be submissive to the law when it comes to doing what really needs to be done to some of those criminals.

reply

[–] PreachCaleb 9 years ago

They give dude a license to go around and do what he does in the first place without getting arrested.

Commissioner Gordon does, not the Gotham PD. Batman is not a deputized member of the police department.

but pulling the trigger on real scumbags is taking it just one step too far now?

Yes. Gordon himself has told Batman that if he ever crosses that line, he'll be the one leading the team to bring him in.

He can't be above the law when the situation see's fit(Spying on people, withholding evidence, illegal INTEL, etc...) and be submissive to the law when it comes to doing what really needs to be done to some of those criminals.

And that's why he's a vigilante and not a police officer.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

[–] jamieparsons1 9 years ago

If Batman killed in self-defence or to save others then I'm sure Gordon would be ok with it. And I'd say Batman would do that too. But if Batman straight out murdered the Joker, then he would be charged just like any other cop would.

reply

[–] howard_w13 9 years ago

Batman's moral code is lame; but then again, what would happen if people started to enforce the law as they see fit? How many more mob trials and executions would we have? The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is meant to ensure that even the vilest of criminals like the Joker is given due process lest we devolve into chaos (yes; I'm aware that this leans in favor of those who violate the law but still.....)

--------
The movie has a plot hole?!?
EVERY FRIGGIN' MOVIE HAS A FRIGGIN' PLOT HOLE!!!!!

reply

[–] PreachCaleb 8 years ago

The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is meant to ensure that even the vilest of criminals like the Joker is given due process lest we devolve into chaos (yes; I'm aware that this leans in favor of those who violate the law but still.....)

Oh no, this leans in the favor of those who don't violate the law. Just look at all the cases that have been turned over or all the innocent people who were wrongly jailed. Now imagine how much higher those numbers would be without due process.

Let's be bad guys.

reply

[–] Phantom_Panther 7 years ago

Batman's moral code is lame; but then again, what would happen if people started to enforce the law as they see fit?

You mean like what Bruce and other superheroes do anyway?

reply

[–] howard_w13 7 years ago

Batman's moral code is lame; but then again, what would happen if people started to enforce the law as they see fit?

You mean like what Bruce and other superheroes do anyway?

No; as is becoming Judge Dredd.
There's a dangerously thin line between justice and vengeance.
--------
The movie has a plot hole?!?
EVERY FRIGGIN' MOVIE HAS A FRIGGIN' PLOT HOLE!!!!!

reply

[–] Phantom_Panther 7 years ago

No; as is becoming Judge Dredd.

I repeat, what do you call what superheroes already do? These guys regularly take the law into their own hands committing all manner of illegal, act like they run the cities they operate in and unethical actions and suffer no consequences for it. Judge Dredd is just more honest about being a fascist prick.

There's a dangerously thin line between justice and vengeance.

A line Bruce crosses a long time ago or what do you think it meant when he decided to put on a Halloween costume to punish criminals for taking his parents from him?

reply

[–] Phantom_Panther 7 years ago

Doesn't stop him from fighting crime.

reply

[–] jamieparsons1 9 years ago

Cops kill people only if they need to. If one were to kill an imprisoned killer, for example, he would be charged with murder as well.

Batman's code isn't getting old, you're just getting cynical.

reply

[–] Samuraibro 8 years ago

Cops kill people only if they need to.



reply

[–] Kent_Kainer 8 years ago

His statement applies to my country too. And most I've been to.

---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!

reply

[–] rmontro 8 years ago

Funny thing is, Batman killed the Joker in the first Michael Keaton movie. What did he think was going to happen?

reply

[–] manofsteel4455 8 years ago

What Gordon's really saying is that Batman shouldn't do anything about all the jokers out there.

reply