Someone redpill me on not killing the villains? How is not protecting

>>92782163
"redpill" is such a stupid, idiotic term.

>>92782163
Because writers would have to keep coming up with new villains.

Superheroes aren't cops or politicians. They defend the defenseless. The people are the ones who decide how to punish criminals.

>>92782163
Capes believe in the justice system.

It's the boots on the street that they choose to pick up the slack for, not judges, juries, or jails.

Batman example: Cops are all corrupt.
Superman example: Cops and soldiers can't fight spaceships and 20 foot tall robots.

To which you'll say
>but they keep escaping prison

To which I say
>Bruce Wayne constantly throws money at trying to build a better Arkham

To which you say
>it doesn't work though

To which I say
>Neither does killing and the capes know it. The frequency of resurrections is acknowledged in-universe all the time

There's been actually stories where Bruce says one of the many reasons he doesn't off the Joker is he's afraid Joker will come back from the dead worse than before"

>>92782220
>>92782163
And then you run into a problem of the Joker being dead when someone has a good story idea for the Joker. How do you salvage the story? Introduce Earth-N Joker? Joker jr.? Clone Joker? Introduce a totally new character called the Jokester?

>>92782258
>Neither does killing
I think death is a better place to keep criminals that have no chance of rehabilitation than a revolving door. Even if it's possible to come back from the dead in that universe, it'd take considerable more effort for them to breakout there than Gotham Asylum

>>92782240
Heroes can't prevent most crimes, only respond and mitigate the damage. How much damage are you mitigating by letting them live

>>92782163
Watch Superman Vs the Elite or read "What's So Funny About Truth, Justice & the American Way?". It'll give you the basic reason on not killing the villain.

And if you're too lazy to do that. The heroes aren't the government. They aren't the Judicial system, the people, or the jury. The moment they get control over who lives and who dies is the moment you better watch your fucking step. Never know when they'll decide you messed up. Could be an accident. Could be being at the wrong place at the wrong time. When power belongs to one body, you best hope you are on that body's side of morality; not the other way around.

>>92782314
>Introduce Earth-N Joker?
Well there are like 12 renditions of the Marvel universe and writers can just jump back and forth between whatever timeline they need their story to work in.

>>92782333
>How much damage are you mitigating by letting them live
It doesn't matter, that's not what they're there to decide.

If society doesn't see it fit to kill criminals, then neither do the heroes.

>>92782314
That seems to work so well for Marve- pffft. Yeah, couldn't even finish that. Heh, fuck. They switch between worlds so often, you tend to forget which one you should give a fuck about.

>>92782363
>It doesn't matter, that's not what they're there to decide.
Why not? Cops do.

>>92782379
>They switch between worlds so often, you tend to forget which one you should give a fuck about.
No, not really.

>>92782387
Cops have to see a therapist if they discharge their firearm. Killing isn't something you can imagine from an armchair.

>>92782163
same reason why policemen dont just gun down all their targets, lethal force is the absolute last resort when all other options have been tried

even SWAT or HRT are trained only to shoot their target when they are actively raising their weapon, simply holding a weapon is not enough to warrant ventilation

a super hero, usually having powers, gadgets, and abilities beyond a normal human, would comparatively have a higher threshold for a "clear and present danger", superman lasering a crook is most certainly not justified since the common crook has no way of harming superman

further, actually killing your villains is far beyond the scope of a superhero, even though they work around the law as vigilantes, they still are not above the law, they are not qualified to take lives whenever they feel like it. they work as an extension of law enforcement, they are the helpful civilian who trips a robber running from the cops on a grand scale. they represent a public service not armed thugs who can take life whenever they feel, that would be the punisher

>>92782351
>>92782363
Why not? Are heroes not people, and are they not entitled to contribute to their community and their own safety?

>>92782351
>Watch Superman Vs the Elite
The only reason the Elite were wrong in that movie is because they were made into "might makes right" strawmen because an actual argument couldn't be formed against the practicality of executing dangerous villains

>>92782387
Cops are allowed to. Bruce doesn't want to make his job harder and go back to the way things were in year one by having the mayor say "he's gone loose cannon, we can't trust him anymore, stop pretending you're hunting the illegal vigilante while working with him behind my back and ACTUALLY take him down"

>>92782404
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

>>92782240
If you're carrying a gun and someone attacks you, or attacks someone close to you who is clearly an innocent party, you're legally justified in shooting and killing him.

Why can't it be the same for heroes, a super villain tries to kill you or someone else, you kill them in self defense

>>92782434
So he makes his job harder by having to fight the Joker every 3 weeks instead?

>>92782217
you are only saying that because you disagree with /pol/'s ideals. It would be like saying "thought crime" is a bad word because Orwell was a socialist.

>>92782427
>I want my society run by rival gangs of vigilantes arbitrarily deciding who they judge to be deserving of death
Jesus fucking Christ,did none of you stupid fucking yanks learn a damn thing from the Northern Irish Troubles?

>>92782379
>That seems to work so well for Marve- pffft. Yeah, couldn't even finish that. Heh, fuck. They switch between worlds so often, you tend to forget which one you should give a fuck about.
What are you talking about? Most stories, especially now, are all in the same universe unless a specific story involves time travel or is expressly set in a different universe like Spider-Gwen or the now defunct Ultimate line

>>92782416
The restraint is to give them the benefit of the doubt and to try to rehabilitate and reintegrate them back into society. Maybe it was an unlucky break. Maybe stress way high and the rent was due. Maybe the wife cheated since day one and was taking away all his money. Maybe it was an actual accident. But what excuse is there for letting the joker romp through gotham over and over again. What excuse is there for Lex Luther to slaughter hundred and thousands in collateral, KNOWING he regrets nothing and never will.

File: DickFromInternet.jpg (49KB, 599x292px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 599x292px

>>92782479

>>92782217
>/pol/ regularly uses a term made by a black women and popularized by a pair of trannies
makes you think

>>92782463
He makes his job the same by having to fight the Joker every three weeks.

Snap Joker's neck, he's back in 3 weeks. Put him in jail, he's back in 3 weeks. Try to catch him but he escapes, he's back in 3 weeks. He blows himself up or falls off a cliff through no fault of your own, he's back in 3 weeks.

Batman knows this, motherfucker. Batman knows.

The difference is, if Batman is SEEN snapping someone's neck, even if that someone comes back, it hurts his rep as "the guy Gordon can trust to ASSIST him."

>>92782479
If someone comes at you with a knife you're allowed to shoot them. If someone comes at you with a deathreay beam you should also shoot them.

>>92782434
cops are allowed to, but it doesnt mean that they shoot to kill as a preventive measure to prevent their targets from commiting harm in the future
unless there is a clear and present danger to them or someone else, no shooting
if a bank robber has been incapacitated, you dont execute them, even if he says he plans to escape from jail and do it again, the cops job is to detain the threat and arrest them, they exist to enforce the law, they are not judge, jury, or executioner

>>92782512
>He makes his job the same by having to fight the Joker every three weeks.
So he's doing nothing. Which is the problem.

>Snap Joker's neck, he's back in 3 weeks
LOL nigga what?

Doesn't mean anything really, but if I were one of these capes, I'd really just ask the government or the U.N or something if they were okay with me 'dealing' with Murder McCrazypants if push came to shove. I mean, really. I doubt that any but the most liberal governments wouldn't give some room to work with for the supers they can trust not to go nuts. They're terrorists. Active, super-powered, mostly non-ideological terrorists that are threatening peoples lives almost all the time. The worst of them tend to be military opponents from different planets/dimensions.

It doesn't have to be 'Orwellian Super-Nightmare Hero' or 'I'm Refuse to take any accountability whatsoever for the deaths caused by my failure to neutralize a constant threat Man'. There's a grey area. Even Superman realizes that, and I'm talking about the non-evil, non-crazy Superman.

>>92782387
No they don't. In theory they only kill criminals to protect another life. Which some superheroes do as well. Cops prioritize taking criminals alive so they can be tried and punished.

But the whole point of SUPERheroes is that they're able to stop criminals without killing them, so that they can always be tried and punished.

>>92782448
If you kill someone that you don't have to kill in order to save yourself or someone else, that isn't self-defense, it's an execution.

For most people, shooting someone in self defense is justified because they aren't a fucking martial artist or have superpowers.

But if you can tear a bus in half with your bare hands and you kill a guy for stealing somebody's purse, that's an execution.

>>92782425
They're not elected, they're vigilantes. If you don't like a law that doesn't entitle you to just go out and disregard it.

You're not really understanding the fact that the USA is made up of a lot of different people with different views and you don't get to just ignore them and do whatever you personally want just because you disagree with them.

>>92782163
The ideology is that Hero's should not kill.

A single person, like Spider-man or Batman, is considered good when they arrest and help people by fighting villains and crime. If that Hero kills those who they deem 'deserving' of death they are now a murderer.
Murdering in the name of your personal views of good/evil right/wrong is an absurd power-trip which transforms a crime fighter (who works outside the system in order to aid the system in catching people who cheat, are very hard to catch or slip through loopholes) into a murderer. (someone who decides they know better than the system, who no longer breaks they law to help serve it, but in order to impose their own version of the law.)

Batman telling the police he thinks the Joker should be executed if they can't keep him imprisoned is very different to simply killing the Joker by himself.

The question is can you still be the good guy if you kill people? Stopping people committing crimes by catching them is simple, but choosing who lives and dies is not something a single person who answers to no one should have the power to do. What is you simply make a wrong decision or mistake? Spiderman kills man he thought was the Chameleon in disguise but was actually not. Should he still be a hero?

In the superhero universe where Prison is meaningless and super-villains can only be stopped by heroes I believe something like killing the Joker is a true good. However the choice to execute a criminal should be made by a court not a single person. Especially not a person who is accountable to no one, above the law, and extremely powerful.


The last point is what happens in a city where crime is so corrupting that criminals don't get punishment. Then the hero is someone who applies the rules of the law to those who cheat out of it's rules. Usually they are forced to kill because nothing else has any effect and they can't make a secret prison. This is a best-of-a-worst-situation thing.

>>92782538
If someone comes at you with a knife and you can still beat them easily without shooting them, and you shoot them anyway, you're a psycho.

>>92782539
Super villains are clear and present dangers all the time. It's literally their entire careers.

>>92782551
>But the whole point of SUPERheroes is that they're able to stop criminals without killing them,
That's retarded though.

>>92782551
>For most people, shooting someone in self defense is justified because they aren't a fucking martial artist or have superpowers
And most people usually aren't attacked by some genocidal maniac with super strength and the powers of flight.

>>92782547
>>Snap Joker's neck, he's back in 3 weeks
>LOL nigga what?

Don't pretend I'm wrong for the sake of a fake argument. You know how comic books work.

And Batman knows how his universe works. Leaguers literally talk about the likelihood of resurrection in the eulogies at their funerals now.

He has literally said he's afraid that if he kills the Joker, he'll either come back worse or Gotham will fill his slot with a worse monster.

File: 3828020-boys61-gumchum.jpg (212KB, 735x800px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 735x800px

>>92782576
>The only rational solution is mass murder

>>92782511
It's pretty damn amazing they decided to use a scene written by two transsexuals of a black man helping a white guy wake up to the reality of the world.

>>92782561
Yeah cause superheroes always have it so easy.

>>92782576
If you don't like the premise of the genre, no one is forcing you to read it. Just walk the fuck away.

>>92782602
I know that quote. From The Amazing Strawman #14 right?

>>92782561
A guy with a knife can still potentially kill you even if you are some ripped as fuck martial artist because he has the advantage of having a weapon, therefore using a superior weapon you've trained with the mitigate risk to yourself is a logical response

File: Knightfall.jpg (65KB, 300x459px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 300x459px

>>92782551
>They're not elected, they're vigilantes. If you don't like a law that doesn't entitle you to just go out and disregard it.
>You're not really understanding the fact that the USA is made up of a lot of different people with different views and you don't get to just ignore them and do whatever you personally want just because you disagree with them.
>No I don't want neighbors to step up for their families, I want law school graduates to determine what I can and can't do
The legitimacy of meme authority is still a meme. The government shouldn't infringe on a man's right to protect the city/state from career super criminals who can only be brought down by said unaccounted for/unreliable vigilantes. If Batman dies, which he did, what happens to Gotham. Oh we saw what happened. The culmination of 20 years of hero work building up to one volcanic catastrophe.
Imagine if batman actually dealt with all of those villians before he died

Justice needs to be as unbiased and unemotional as possible. Killing someone is a response filled with bias and emotion.

>>92782621
I'm not autistic enough to let no kill rules hamper my overall enjoyment of capeshit. But if someone brings it up I can and will say that it doesn't make much sense.

>>92782640
I'm not a superhero.

There's a reason Victor Zsasz is a joke these days. "Guy with a knife" is not even a threat to Spoiler, the weakest and dumbest of the batfamily.

>>92782404

I know cops that dont give a fuck about killing thugs and human garbage and still are good, sane people.

When you live with death, dying, killing and suffering on a regular basis, you know whats at stake and you truly know someone is just not a good human being with a chance for a future, it's a shame, but you don't feel it. It's not PC to say, but it's possible to kill while not being negatively affected by it, and it is even to feel satisfied, without being a psychopath of some kind. Humans have never lost the ability to fight and kill while still being socially functional and rational.

Lets remember "the system" is also made of people, and they truly choose arbitrarily who lives or dies.

>>92782644
>Killing someone is a response filled with bias and emotion.
It could just as well be a utilitarian decision based on reason and rationality. Doing the opposite is even more based in emotion.

>>92782686
You do understand that "guy with a knife" is an analogy, yes?

>>92782700
>cops that dont give a fuck about killing thugs and human garbage
>still are good, sane people.

In your judgment.

Which I do not trust.

>>92782686
To be fair though, Batman is just a guy with black underwear.

>>92782163
It depends on the writer. Sometimes you'll get explanations about the possibility for redemption, for not wanting to become judge and jury, for fear they might start going further, so on and so forth. Ultimately, it's whatever the writer decides.

The two ones which have traditionally been most consistent have been Superman and Batman, and the ones whose code of no killing is usually emphasized the most. Superman is generally about a higher moral good, either out of a sincere belief in people or not wishing to intercede in affairs and thus color them for people. For Batman...

Batman's undergone a weird slide. Originally (and by originally I mean sometime after they decided he would stop running around and shooting a gun) it seemed to share that seem ideal, but as time's gone on and as the tone of Batman's stories have slid darker and darker, it's warped the nature of that same pledge. Batman doesn't have the same faith in others Superman has, or the same belief in or respect for the law (anymore, anyway), and his nonlethal code seems more and more like a personal conceit than out of some actual belief in the right thing; it seems more like something he can point to and go "see, I'm better than these guys I fight." This, of course, varies depending on what universe and what writer.

>>92782715
It's a weak one.

If a guy has a laser instead of a knife, he can be disarmed.

A lot of the guys whose lasers are bodyparts can't BE killed.

We could talk about each supervillain in the DCU case-by-case and separate the "coulds" and "shoulds" out if you like.

>>92782735

You shouldnt trust any judge in the system either then, because they think the same in private.

Everyone in law enforcement except the most safe pencil pushers is jaded enough to know the world doesnt work on the same rules as the ones we are taught. Life is not that precious, especially if you cant defend it with any means necessary.

>>92782258
>Bruce Wayne constantly throws money at trying to build a better Arkham

Too bad he's from a capeverse. IRL US he could just get a concession to build a prison of his own and plain don't deal with Arkham's failure rate any longer.

>>92782774
>It's a weak one.
No it isn't.

>A lot of the guys whose lasers are bodyparts can't BE killed.
There are plenty who can. Most in fact.

>>92782774
>he can be disarmed
Killing him is far safer and easier, and completely justified.
It's like when people ask "why don't cops just shoot the gun out of his hands/shoot his knees," because shots like that are really fucking hard to make, especially in stressful situations. Military, cops, and civilians all train to hit center of mass.

>>92782774
>If a guy has a laser instead of a knife, he can be disarmed

Its just a different kind of gun.

>>92782563
most super villains are taken down non-lethally, anyways
most are rendered harmless when removed from their equipment or fitted with suitable restraints
there is a big difference between "villain shoots me, i shoot him back, villain is now dead ", which is mostly acceptable and "i have brought the villain down to his knees and he is no longer resisting, and i blast him anyways because he will just escape", which is something you dont do, since you are effectively saying "i am above the law, due process is a joke, and my judgement is far superior to any body of elected officials"
thats the kind of thing you can only get away with once in your career, and it will take the form of a 5-issue special, and will haunt you for a long time

the reason why the punisher is hated in-universe is because he is effectively judge, jury, executioner all rolled into one, and the only reason the other superheroes dont go out of their way to bag him is because he usually kills the right guys, but he is still sending an implicit message with every kill "i am better than the law"

>>92782163
>Someone redpill me on not killing the villains?

Seeing how everybody comes back to life anyway, murdering them is a cruel and unusal type of imprisonment.

Superheros just beat people who surrendered into a bloddy mess, they don't administer cruel and unusual punishments.

>>92782163

One reason that occasionally makes sense and is used, is that you never know when a villain's skills might turn out useful. Same reason why we keep stacks of ebola under lock instead of just burning it all.

>>92782883
the trapster, when he was known as paste pot pete, made a solvent for adhesive X in exchange for a lighter sentence

>>92782839
I agree. Executing subdued criminals would be a serious problem. If the only why to fight a villain is to beat them into submission killing them afterward becomes a lot less reasonable. That said, if I were leading a team of heroes I'd encourage responding to threats on lives with the quickest, safest and most efficient way of ending the threat up to and including lethal force.

>>92782837
>killing is easier than disarming

Let's say you have a guy with Supes' strength. And he's holding a sci-fi laser gun.

What's easier, smacking the gun out of his hand or destroying it with heat vision, or trying to wrestle him into a chokehold and snap his neck?

File: Chirico drink.jpg (33KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 480x480px

>>92782220
this is the only answer
any other amounts to stupidity and brand loyalty

It's even why I stopped believing in "superheroes" as a child.

>>92782967
But what if its a guy with superman's strength and pointing scifi laser eyes at a bunch of innocent people? Perhaps inside a bank or something.

>>92782163
What if the Villain is mentally insane?
What if the Villain is mind controlled?
What if the Hero mistakes a person to be a villain?
There's too many variables to kill without prejudice and when they do start killing then they wont be welcomed by the people. You think if Batman starts killing the GCPD will cooperate with him?

>>92782314
Guys, I have a great idea where the Joker kills off several major Batman characters like Commissioner Gordon, Alfred, and Catwoman. Make sure he stays alive or else I can't make my brilliant cutting-edge story ideas canon.

>>92783014
In that case, what you do is, you ignore his terraforming machine on the other side of the world, because it only works in tandem with his spaceship.

You go after his spaceship, and you personally make sure either he's on it or tackle him into it, when you send it to the Phantom Zone.

Doing this will save a LOT more lives (including Professor Hamilton, who's a pretty cool guy) than fighting him for fifteen minutes and killing him.

I mean if they have the ability to bring them to justice without killing them, they should. Cops dont just start blasting people unless someone pulls a weapon on them.

File: Capture.png (191KB, 389x387px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 389x387px

>>92782511

>/pol/ regularly uses a term that is a pseudo-anagram of liberal

Really activates those almonds mega net teen higher reee desused desused senpaisennes.

captcha very much related.

This whole rotating letters meme is never going to catch on, is it?
>>92782539

Pretty sure most cops don't actually want to shoot people.

>>92782163
Here's the real redpill: "not killing villains" and "villains" themselves are concepts intended for children.

If you actually had a realistic depiction of a character with superpowers, he would have to ask himself awkward questions, such as "Why do the men with guns get to decide what the law is when I am invulnerable to bullets?"

Law is a community thing, yes. But it's obviously not a communal thing. It's not an absolute majority vote from the populace every time a law is passed. A small number of people who already hold the reins decide what the laws are, how to interpret them, how to enforce them, how not to enforce them.

Historically speaking, there's huge turnover between dictatorships and democracies. The figureheads die and the faceless decision makers - civil servants and other entrenched government figures - keep making the decisions, the same as always.

>>92785294
>"Why do the men with guns get to decide what the law is when I am invulnerable to bullets?"
I cut myself from the edge Sempai.

>>92785294
So, for example, let's suppose there were a character called Weedman. You know where this is going. For the record, I have never smoked weed and don't have any interest in doing it.

His grandmother's cancer was eased by medicinal marijuana, but a cannabis leaf was made radioactive by the chemo and something something he became Weedman!

Now, with the power of getting high (off the ground) and blazing it (with his fire breath) as long as he has a regular supply of blunts on his bluntility belt (like Waterman and water,) Weedman faces a difficult crime fighting career.

How should he interpret the sometimes prohibitive cannabis legislation in the US?
Does he abandon his powers in certain states? When he has such positive feelings about weed, does he actively attempt to help cannabis users hide their crops?

I'm using this as an example because it's not a very controversial law to break. Why on earth would a superhero who is all about smokeherb obey the grassweed laws if they troubled his lawn-blunting?

Now, if we transfer this question into a serious dramatic situation, where the superhero knows he needs to kill someone to prevent an indisputably worse loss of life, say one million deaths, would he even consider consulting the lawbooks or calling the police department?

1)Killing people is shockingly difficult to do from a mental perspective. Yeah yeah trained super people what fight the crimes, you say. Check out the accuracy in battle of soldiers across the years. They're our closest benchmark.

2)Congrats mr. super awesome hero of the people, you just completely ruined your pr. That feeling of being worshiped by the peasants? Fucking gone, people hate you now. Why?

You're outside of the law. Turning the baddies into the cops instills some trust between you and the people. You're on their side, you work within their system, you respect them and their lives. You start killing baddies and next thing you know people stop waling the streets afraid that if they jaywalk you'll fucking kill them too. Where's your limit? They don't fucking know. That scales too, if we're talking about a more super super then next thing you know nations are afraid to jaywalk because at any moment you can just wipe them off the fucking map. After all if you can punch a cosmic horror in the dick how could sovereignty matter?

>>92785309
There's so much emotion implied in the word "edge" that it is difficult to argue with or discuss.

I'm describing an unrealistic and fantastical rebellion against all law, which is something an adolescent might daydream about, yes.

Or he could just read a comic book with all of that power-fantasising, but with one teensy extra line in the sand that makes it not edgy, or something.

What I'm pointing out is that a serious treatment of superhero characters is an inherently immature concept. The moment it goes PG-13, you are in edge city.

>>92782627

No. No such comic exists.

File: Ever hear something so stupid it gives you Deforest Kelly face.jpg (28KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 480x480px

>>92785402

>>92782983
Wow you're so cool anon!

mostly to avoid stepping on government toes. the police drag people to court, the courts convict them and carry out the judgement.
inserting a super hero in that mix just makes everyone not wearing the cape mad, and they make it hard on the hero even if he/she is doing a good job.

tl;dr the police own a monopoly on violence, the courts a monopoly on justice.

>>92786414
the govenrments monopoly on violence is a pretty important concept
if superheroes are allowed to kill whenever they want, and thus have someone other than the police allowed to dispense violence, then this makes everyone with a ski mask and a gun able to run around killing other people in the name of their own interpretation of justice

Its retarded, but happens cause people like the villians so they need to be able to have them murder again

Batman killed the joker in his first apearance for christs sake. The only reason he came back is cause he was popular

>>92782163
Superheroes by and large not killing is a huge part of the genre. Stop quoting fucking Kamen Rider.

If you wanna see a real world reason why murderous vigilantism is a bad idea look over at the Philippines right now. I think Durete's promised rape rights to his drug fightin' pals at this point.

>>92782163
its only stupid when the villain kills your wife and nukes a city

its even stupider when you take in the accomplice, give her full freedom and a pill that makes her just as strong as the man she fucked up

>>92782163
Good villains never really die. Just have them fall off something or go missing in an explosion.

>>92786449
That's a stupid "slippery slope" argument.

>>92786743
>go missing in an explosion
This is my favorite.

>every trace of enemy goes missing
>better assume they're dead and forget about them until they show up again again