Tens of Thousands have died because he refuses to kill a handful of villains

How can a man who wrote Batman not understand that Alfred airs up the tires? Is Grant actually a moron who tricked people into thinking he’s a wizard?

>Dont ask questions just buy more comics!

Tens of thousands have died because the government can't do their fucking job.

He was making fun of the existence of Harold, I think.

>The government, not the state, handles individual cities

Yikes, user... why post about something you know nothing about?

Him and every cop and every jury are all monsters, I guess?

I agree, though: I think the better conceit for why his villains continue to exist would be if they were often foiled, but not so frequently captured. The "revolving door of Arkham" conceit makes everyone look really dumb and incompetent, and inspires repetitive threads like this.

Batman's pathological fear of causing or allowing death is a neat character bit, though.

He's a vigilante that can't trust himself to make the ultimate decision of life or death.

He hands everyone over to the authorities who fuck up on their end.

Gotham is cursed to always have murderers running lose so he could kill them all and they'd be back in some form tomorrow.

That's obviously not the point, learn2read

>The government, not the state government
Are you retarded.

More like "superhero comics aren't meant to be realistic, read them as allegorical or mythological confrontations and don't obsess over minutiae at the expense of the narrative and the characters".

>Hey, this person doesn't kill criminals, he is an awful human being
Americans, everyone.

>Americans, everyone.
Kind of. A lot of Americans DO seem to really favour putting everything on individual accountability, while pathologically ignoring or rejecting the very idea of "systemic issues."

Hence, if a criminal breaks free of jail and terrorizes Gotham, it's BATMAN'S fault for not killing them, not the fault of law enforcement, the state, or the socio-cultural norms (or sinsiter curse) of Gotham that both create the villains and ensure they continue to exist and operate freely.

>>>/Tumblr/

>Blaming the person who stops the murderers instead of the murderers themselves
Yeah makes so much sense.
And going by your logic, you should blame every cop and judge in Gotham for not killing his villains either.

This

Most stories DO have the death penalty in Gotham but apparently it can't be applied to the "criminally insane".

In Joker: Devil's Advocate, the Joker is given the death penalty for a crime he didn't commit and Batman moves hell and high water to exonerate him.

Yet Batman won't vote for Donald Trump

Should also blame Batman's parents for dying.

Real heroes do not kill. Killing is wrong, no matter how you slice it or try to justify it.

Real heroes save lives. All lives. Nobody dies. Nobody deserves to die, no matter what they've done. Not even killers deserve to die. They need to be saved, just like all their victims. Saved from themselves.

Real Heroes save the bad guys, and make them good guys. Real heroes inspire others to become heroes. The true way to defeat evil is to change it into something good, not defeat it with another act of evil.

Someone has to make elaborate plans to take down the JLA so villains can steal them time after time and use them to put billions at risk, Op. those plans aren’t going to make themselves.

You can say the same for virtually any other hero character that doesn't kill. It's comics, this is always used as a plot device so they can keep reusing villains.
Also killing a villain in DC isn't guaranteed to really fix anything since they could always come back as a vengeful ghost, or go to Hell and be resurrected with demonic powers.

Batman is a more interesting character when his allies or enemies question his methods and ethics

More "nitpicking the lack of certain details which would add nothing to the story if developed on is meaningless"

If all the villains died, he won't have anything better do.

Atleast kill Zsasz or joker jeez

If he killed all the killers, he would be the only killer left.

Does anyone have the name of the book where somone dreams batman rapes him

Batman setting is full of moronic people. I mean beyond the acceptable for the suspension of disbelief.
If Gotham was such a lawless shithole, it would be under state or federal intervention. A place with marauding terrorists or mass murders around would not rely solely on the local police force and a costumed vigilante to do what needs to be done. Gotham is in the US not some Latin America shithole or Somalia.
People like the Joker, with a body rack like that would be considered "insane". Hell, a guy like that would attract national or even world wide attention. Nobody would put a guy like him in a municipal asylum time and time over. Such asylum would have been closed long before. In any case the crimes we see Batman rogue galleries to commit would be on federal level many times over. They wouldn't be just shipped to a municipal asylum or some state prison just like that.
The gripe isn't about Batman not killing, but a setting where Gotham is some hellish crime beyond the infested city far beyond the accepted, filled with terrorists and mass murderers around and nobody in the government or the society moving a finger to really tackle the situation.

>If Gotham was such a lawless shithole, it would be under state or federal intervention

Clearly you’ve never been to any major city in the US before.

I love it when normies think Arkham Asylum is the least secure facility in the world, when every supervillain prison is as bad and Arkham happens to be the only one they know the name of.
I dislike it when writers take the normie stance and explicitly calls it a revolving door, ignoring the fact that Batman takes place in a floating timeline where events repeat themselves forever and nothing changes. Joker hasn't killed 10,000 people and escaped from Arkham 700 times, he's just escaped for the first time, every time. His murder count is maybe 10 and it will never change. Ever.

>Batman fans want him to be hardcore but his editor won't let him.

At this point your thread is basically spam, fuck off with the selective rulefaggotry.

Not his responsibility to kill them, blame the government

comics aren't real.

For the millionth time, somebody else killing people isn’t on him. Plenty of other people know The Joker and know what he’s capable of, but they don’t kill him. Joker killing people is Jokers action to own up to and his alone. Batman has nothing to do with it.

He has on the sense that he's depicted as the only person in the whole planet capable of stopping the Joker. The police is utterly useless, other heroes rarely capture him. It's basically Batman, so in a sense he's responsible for the Joker running amok, because everybody else is utterly retarded.
Seriously, the writers should stop treating the Joker as some "unpredictable chaotic force of nature" that kills scores of people, cheats death like nothing and only Batman can stop him to another mobster with a clown theme.

Stop trying to rationalize this stupid shit. They don't kill major villains so they can keep using them. Joker makes more money than any character other than Batman. That's why he keeps showing up. FUCK

No it isnt Batman’s fault he’s running amok. He locks him away each time. Batman’s not the one letting him out.

Killing him has been explained time and time again why Batman won’t do that and why that isn’t the answer. It’s literally the plot of Injustice.

Isn't there a Elseworlds story that went like that? Batman stopped crime then went crazy because he didn't have anything to take his anger and depression out on
Zsasz did nothing wrong, user.

All these characters are larger than life symbolic embodiments of metaphysical concepts, Batman and Joker included. And, personally, I like that kind of thing.

Is it really? How do you ban an anonymous user?

Also, how do you decide what constitutes “derai a thread”?

In the long Halloween, he makes a comment about how a certain villain should go to the gas chamber. Seems like he's not against it as long as it's legal.