Batman's No Kill Rule is Mentally Retarded - A Rant

Comments · 4.2K

• BL

  @BlackOmega9 · 2 years ago

  The rule worked when it was campy Adam West style Batman. But when the Joker goes from troublemaking miscreant to filling mass graves for a laugh, there's a point where you'd need less Batman, and more Dirty Harry.

  3.5K

• WI

  @wilji1090 · 2 years ago

  I feel like the No-Kill rule works for villains like Two Face or Penguin but SOMEONE should’ve 86’d Joker well before Jason Todd got a cranium rearrangement via clown crowbar

  885

• ER

  @erisi236 · 2 years ago

  "All the people I murdered, by letting you live" - Batman in one of his saner moments

  2.5K

• AM

  @Amesang · 2 years ago

  Even <i>Dragon Ball Z</i> pointed out that some villains (notably Cell and Majin Buu) can <i>not</i> be reasoned with…

  283

• LO

  @LordNifty · 2 years ago

  I remember a crossover where the Punisher almost kills the Joker (&quot;I&apos;ve got all the therapy you need right here, comedian.&quot;, as he points a pistol at Joker), and Batman stops him and actually tells the Joker to run away. &nbsp;Batman then threatens to put Frank in Arkham after the Joker escapes with Batman&apos;s willing help. &nbsp;I remember thinking &quot;If the people of Gotham could have seen that moment, I&apos;m pretty sure almost everyone would have permanently turned against Batman.&quot;

  2.1K

• LO

  @lockman776 · 2 years ago

  &quot;If you murder a murderer, there&apos;s still the same amount of murderers in the world.&quot;<br><br>That&apos;s why you don&apos;t stop at one bats.

  1.4K

• DU

  @Duraganthelion · 2 years ago

  &quot;Why doesn&apos;t Batman kill his foes?&quot;<br><br>Arm Chair philosopher; &quot;Because <b>insert 50-page essay on why</b><br><br>Real world; &quot;Because then they&apos;d have to invent a new villain to kill week after week.

  1.3K

• SH

  @shrikebutcherbird · 2 years ago

  Nobody tell Razor about the time Dick Grayson beat the Joker to death and then Batman had him resuscitated

  712

• MA

  @madamefluffy4788 · 2 years ago

  &apos;what if the villains have children? It would be wrong to put those kids through the same every day Hell that he (Batman) is going through if Batman killed their parent(s)&apos;<br><br>Or, on the flip side, Batman could be doing that kid a huge favor by removing a violent/toxic person from their lives. Just because a person has a kid, doesn&apos;t mean they&apos;re loving parents. A villainous &nbsp;parent may very well be physically hurting that kid or raising that child to become just like them when they grow into adulthood. &nbsp;Funny how folks never think of that when defending Batman&apos;s &apos;no kill&apos; rule.

  104

• RO

  @RogueFox2185 · 2 years ago (edited)

  I have no issue with Batman placing a limit on himself with his No Kill Rule and I understand his reasons for choosing that path, however what always annoyed the hell out of me is that he usually expects everyone else to hold themselves to that very same standard. <br><br>For example both Jim Gordon and Jason Todd have EVERY right to personally put that clown in the dirt for good after everything he’s done to them over the years, including the countless horrifically evil actions he has committed against the citizens of Gotham on a daily basis and yet Batman always gets in their way.

  1.9K

• LE

  @LetholdusKaspyr · 2 years ago

  Even without the Batmobile, Batman dispenses blunt force trauma like Halloween candy. &nbsp;The idea that he can physically incapacitate hundreds people with punches, kicks, and slams &nbsp;and NONE of them died of internal bleeding is just insane.

  1.6K

• IN

  @inkchariot6147 · 2 years ago

  If they refuse rehabilitation and redemption, then they accept execution.

  344