Dick Grayson: Murderer? [Archive] - Comic Book Resources Forums

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 06:53 AM

It could be said about Dick Grayson, that he is one of the most emotionally stable super hero's out there. Despite the tragedy that has befallen him, and being raised by Bruce Wayne, he's one of the friendliest and most well loved hero's amongst the DCU. For all intent and purposes, he's perfectly normal. But does that make him an even more likely candidate for murder?

With Bruce it's hard to say he's the picture of normality. He's trained himself to be an almost unmovable block of calculating non-emotion. Despite this, even he tried with all his ability to try to kill the Joker when he killed Jason Todd.

Then we look at what Dick has done in the past. He allowed Tarantula to kill Blockbuster, simply because Blockbuster was threatening his loved ones. Dick for one split second took him as a serious threat, and let him die.

So what happens when someone Dick loves is killed right in front of him? He wasn't there when it happened to Bruce, Jason, or Babs. Because Dick is so emotionally stable, perhaps he would have the same reaction any emotionally stable person would have in the case of murdered loved one. He might cry, he could be depressed, and he could want revenge.

So, do you think Dick Grayson is more likely to kill, because he's so normal?

worstblogever

10-04-2009, 07:42 AM

ryerye17

10-04-2009, 07:43 AM

He could get raped again. :)

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 08:33 AM

Didn't he try to kill the Joker at the end of Last Laugh, as well? I can't remember if Bruce had to snap him out of it or not, but he was about ready to kill the Clown Prince of Crime with his bare hands.

Oh man! How could I forget!

Exactly my point! He DID kill the Joker in The Last Laugh. He killed him because he thought the Joker had let Killer Croc eat Tim! Bruce had to come in and revive the Joker.

Now, don't you think it's a bit dangerous to have a two time murderer running around as Batman!?

Jorriss

10-04-2009, 08:41 AM

Now, don't you think it's a bit dangerous to have a two time murderer running around as Batman!?
No, not in the slightest. It'd be pretty easy to justify the two acts you brought up. Now if he starts murdering teenagers who steal cars or something, I would agree, but letting Desmond die and killing Joker, not so much.

Joe Acro

10-04-2009, 08:42 AM

Now, don't you think it's a bit dangerous to have a two time murderer running around as Batman!?
He's not a murderer. He's a one-time accessory to murder and one-time attempted murderer. (And I doubt a jury would convict in either case.)

That said, I like about Dick. That he can be pushed to a breaking point. It makes him more human than most heroes.

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 09:36 AM

He's not a murderer. He's a one-time accessory to murder and one-time attempted murderer. (And I doubt a jury would convict in either case.)

Even still, he killed the Joker, and he's every bit as guilty as for the death of Blockbuster as Tarantula. Attempted or Accessory, either way, it ends with murder.

Now, I love Grayson. I am perfectly happy if Bruce never comes back. Besides Morrisons writing of him the past couple years, I have been way more interested in reading Nightwing and Robin than Tec' or Batman. So, I'm not trying to say anything bad about Dick per se, I'm just trying to get a good discussion of the ramifications of what happens if the Batman kills someone.

Bruce has made some bad choices when it comes to choosing people to take the mantle of the Bat. Yet, I don't think anyone bat an eyelash when the idea of Dick taking over for Bruce came up. But no one's ever considered, maybe Dick is too normal to be Batman?

Jorriss

10-04-2009, 09:54 AM

Bruce has made some bad choices when it comes to choosing people to take the mantle of the Bat. Yet, I don't think anyone bat an eyelash when the idea of Dick taking over for Bruce came up. But no one's ever considered, maybe Dick is too normal to be Batman?
*Sorry my last post sounds dickish.

I don't see the issue with a normal Batman. He is as effective a crimefighter and I don't find it alarming what Dick did given what occurred. What it comes down to is simply how good is he at stopping crime and he is as good as Bruce (for arguments sake) so I don't mind if he is more normal or not. From the way I saw it part of the criteria of being Batman was not being mentally unstable, just caring and driven.

DetectiveDupin

10-04-2009, 09:59 AM

Grayson is a lot more fun and light than Batman, IMO Batman is a lot more likely to snap one day. Grayson killing would be like Spider-man killing. However mad they get, they can never be that dark of characters.

Red Lotus

10-04-2009, 10:05 AM

Even still, he killed the Joker, and he's every bit as guilty as for the death of Blockbuster as Tarantula. Attempted or Accessory, either way, it ends with murder.

Now, I love Grayson. I am perfectly happy if Bruce never comes back. Besides Morrisons writing of him the past couple years, I have been way more interested in reading Nightwing and Robin than Tec' or Batman. So, I'm not trying to say anything bad about Dick per se, I'm just trying to get a good discussion of the ramifications of what happens if the Batman kills someone.

Bruce has made some bad choices when it comes to choosing people to take the mantle of the Bat. Yet, I don't think anyone bat an eyelash when the idea of Dick taking over for Bruce came up. But no one's ever considered, maybe Dick is too normal to be Batman?

He didn't try to kill Blockbuster or help kill him. He was both emotionally and physical exhausted when the Tarantula killed Blockbuster so much so that you can question if he would have been able to stop her if he tried.

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 10:23 AM

He didn't try to kill Blockbuster or help kill him. He was both emotionally and physical exhausted when the Tarantula killed Blockbuster so much so that you can question if he would have been able to stop her if he tried.

You know, I've read and re-read that scene about a million times. And you're right, he was emotionally and physically exhausted, but that's part of the job. He could have stopped Tarantula, he just didn't want to.

Grayson is a lot more fun and light than Batman, IMO Batman is a lot more likely to snap one day. Grayson killing would be like Spider-man killing. However mad they get, they can never be that dark of characters.

But he has already. Dick Grayson has killed, and has allowed others to be killed.

Joe Acro

10-04-2009, 11:14 AM

You know, I've read and re-read that scene about a million times. And you're right, he was emotionally and physically exhausted, but that's part of the job. He could have stopped Tarantula, he just didn't want to.
More to the point, he had a moment of doubt. And that moment led to Blockbuster's death.

To answer the question you posed, though, were he to kill someone as Batman, I imagine the public reaction would depend on who he killed.

WorstThingUS

10-04-2009, 12:23 PM

You know, I've read and re-read that scene about a million times. And you're right, he was emotionally and physically exhausted, but that's part of the job. He could have stopped Tarantula, he just didn't want to.

Exactly, this was admitted and discussed by Dick in subsequent issues. He's not pretending anything less happened so fans shouldn't try and rationalize it either....though I do. In my opinion he'd suffered a concussion from the beating he'd allowed Blockbuster to give him in order to obtain a confession which led to all his subsequent out-of-character actions.

But he has already. Dick Grayson has killed, and has allowed others to be killed.

Aside from letting Blockbuster get murdered, beating the Joker to death, in battles to rescue a kidnapped Starfire, as Robin he killed left and right and Marv Wolfman refused to back away from it, saying they were in a war and just punching people wasn't going to work. But this was pre-crisis where even Batman admittedly had killed, though he wasn't proud of it.

And I knew this discussion felt familiar: http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=223050

DetectiveDupin

10-04-2009, 12:59 PM

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 01:14 PM

Even so, Dick didn't directly kill him. This is a bit like Spider-man also, in that Peter didn't stop the robber that wound up killing Uncle Ben. It was just a bad decision, and if you want to get into that Bruce has made many.

No, it would be like if Peter Parker caught the robber, the robber threatened to kill Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Gwen Stacy, Harry Osborn, and Mary Jane. Then Uncle Ben walked in with a gun, and asked Peter to hand over the robber so that Ben could shoot him.

Big difference.

T Hedge Coke

10-04-2009, 01:22 PM

In this fancy new miracle anticrisis world of yours, is Dick Grayson a better man? Tt! I didn't think so.

Maybe when he was young, but Dick's been raised well. Raised right. He may have a greater sense of responsibility than even his father, Daddy Waynebucks. I believe in Richard Grayson, because Richard Grayson gives a damn.

aut0matic

10-04-2009, 01:51 PM

for that matter, batman has attempted to kill as well. he had every intent on killing darkseid in final crisis, though i'd hardly call it "murder" even though it was pre-meditated...

DetectiveDupin

10-04-2009, 02:08 PM

No, it would be like if Peter Parker caught the robber, the robber threatened to kill Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Gwen Stacy, Harry Osborn, and Mary Jane. Then Uncle Ben walked in with a gun, and asked Peter to hand over the robber so that Ben could shoot him.

Big difference.

A dangerous man is a dangerous man. Any criminal is a threat to you and your loved ones. Batman has indirectly killed many allowing the Joker to live. Let's not get into ethics when it comes to comics. As for that specific arc, I am not a fan of it and I call it bad writing.

Murrocko

10-04-2009, 02:09 PM

Didn't Dick also kill that Hawkman in Tomasi's arc. Let lightning strike him then drown.

T Hedge Coke

10-04-2009, 02:54 PM

Batman has indirectly killed many allowing the Joker to live.

Oh, please. "Indirectly killed" always sounds like it comes directly out of the justification speech in an Eighties vigilante cop movie.

It's just as easy to say everyone in Gotham, or on Earth, who hasn't killed the Joker has indirectly killed. Or that everyone who has bought a Coke, thereby funding their rather nasty behaviour and backings in parts of the world, has indirectly killed. Anyone who believed a politician sent soldiers to die somewhere that politician knew the soldiers didn't need to be, and did not kill the politician to stop it.

There's a viewpoint that draws that magic line at any of the above, but it isn't the only viewpoint and it is never the only valid viewpoint. And we are, after all, talking about Batman and not reality. Illustrative fiction, not a document on how to live life

Let's not get into ethics when it comes to comics.

Are comics not up to it? Or do you mean superhero comics, with that comics?

WorstThingUS

10-04-2009, 05:35 PM

A dangerous man is a dangerous man. Any criminal is a threat to you and your loved ones. Batman has indirectly killed many allowing the Joker to live. Let's not get into ethics when it comes to comics. As for that specific arc, I am not a fan of it and I call it bad writing.

No, you compared two completely dissimilar situations. The thief in Spider-man was unarmed when Peter let him go. Tarantula has a gun on Blockbuster and tells Nightwing to move and ultimately, after much taunting and threatening by Blockbuster he does and she kills hims. He then goes into shock and gets raped by her on the roof. The only thing those two situations has in common is that someone ultimately dies due to hero inaction, but they aren't even close to being the same.

Didn't Dick also kill that Hawkman in Tomasi's arc. Let lightning strike him then drown.

He obviously couldn't cause a lightning strike, but he failed make the prequisite superhero attempt to save a villain, like Wonder Woman just did when Genocide fell into the ocean or Captain America once did when Mr. Hyde fell into the ocean. It's one of the oldest rules in the superhero handbook, yet he didn't follow it. I was surprised too.

WorstThingUS

10-04-2009, 06:08 PM

For people who clearly don't know how Blockbuster was killed:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3523/3795225455_22ac3b899e_b.jpg

then two pages of Blockbuster taunting which leads to this:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3492/3796046302_01d2a9356f_b.jpg

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n152/Runespoor7/NightwingPyrate-DCPpg18-1.jpg

Jenos

10-04-2009, 08:11 PM

Why are people harping on Dick's actions with blockbuster. Its heavily implied that Bruce himself forgave Dick for that, AND he made the distinction between murder, even being an accessory to it, and what Dick did(n't) do. According to Bruce, not stopping a murder is not the same as actively doing it, though both are wrong in his ethical system.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/8526/page00007.jpg

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 08:18 PM

Yeah... but Bruce is crazy. :)

DetectiveDupin

10-04-2009, 10:08 PM

Oh, please. "Indirectly killed" always sounds like it comes directly out of the justification speech in an Eighties vigilante cop movie.

It's just as easy to say everyone in Gotham, or on Earth, who hasn't killed the Joker has indirectly killed. Or that everyone who has bought a Coke, thereby funding their rather nasty behaviour and backings in parts of the world, has indirectly killed. Anyone who believed a politician sent soldiers to die somewhere that politician knew the soldiers didn't need to be, and did not kill the politician to stop it.

There's a viewpoint that draws that magic line at any of the above, but it isn't the only viewpoint and it is never the only valid viewpoint. And we are, after all, talking about Batman and not reality. Illustrative fiction, not a document on how to live life

Are comics not up to it? Or do you mean superhero comics, with that comics?

It's not the same thing because Batman is the Joker's primary nemesis, and has had many the time to kill him. Could Gothamites kill the Joker? Most of them are afraid of him, but Batman isn't. Batman could very easily make the Joker a vegetable. But it doesn't happen because the Joker is $$$$ to DC.

And of course I meant super-hero comics, or do you need to be spoon-fed that too?

DetectiveDupin

10-04-2009, 10:11 PM

No, you compared two completely dissimilar situations. The thief in Spider-man was unarmed when Peter let him go. Tarantula has a gun on Blockbuster and tells Nightwing to move and ultimately, after much taunting and threatening by Blockbuster he does and she kills hims. He then goes into shock and gets raped by her on the roof. The only thing those two situations has in common is that someone ultimately dies due to hero inaction, but they aren't even close to being the same.

Well, can you produce the panels to get this over with? Otherwise, I am not sure Peter knew the thief was unarmed, he had to have been armed to rob someone in the first place.

WorstThingUS

10-04-2009, 11:11 PM

Well, can you produce the panels to get this over with? Otherwise, I am not sure Peter knew the thief was unarmed, he had to have been armed to rob someone in the first place.

Yeah, because no one ever stole anything with just the threat of violence or just being plain sneaky.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/11.jpg

Sn4tcH

10-04-2009, 11:14 PM

Well, can you produce the panels to get this over with? Otherwise, I am not sure Peter knew the thief was unarmed, he had to have been armed to rob someone in the first place.

Nightwing let Blockbuster go with the FULL INTENTION of letting Tarantula kill him.

Peter Parker allowed a villain to escape, and radioactive fate bit him in the butt. Batman in some way has tried to save every person who has died, by trying to get these villains help and change their ways.

Nightwing threw a man into a proverbial pit of lions and watched him get torn up.

Lorendiac

10-05-2009, 09:34 AM

Jenos

10-05-2009, 12:40 PM

Years ago, I pointed out that Dick Grayson (and various other Teen Titans) appeared to be using deadly force in a 1982 "New Teen Titans" story arc when they traveled to other worlds in a quest to rescue Starfire after she'd been captured by her worst enemies (the Citadel, the Gordanians, and Kori's evil sister Blackfire).

The whole thing had a certain "Star Wars" feel to it. I don't remember Dick or Wally or anyone else later giving any of their "mentors" (Bruce, Barry, etc.) detailed descriptions of what they had done to the enemies they encountered on battlefields, very far away from Earth and its laws. It is possible that Batman et al. still live in blissful ignorance regarding just how many sentient beings the Titans killed (or helped allies such as the Omega Men find opportunities to kill) in the course of that adventure.

I think thats more a result of the inherent Speciesism thats often seen in comics as a whole - the vow to not kill only applies to humans. I mean, you don't see Batman going in and fighting against animals being used in medical testing, which means he inherently values humans more than animals. Whether or not it is right, if Batman did actually value animals as much as humans, he would act differently.

Lorendiac

10-05-2009, 02:11 PM

I think thats more a result of the inherent Speciesism thats often seen in comics as a whole - the vow to not kill only applies to humans. I mean, you don't see Batman going in and fighting against animals being used in medical testing, which means he inherently values humans more than animals. Whether or not it is right, if Batman did actually value animals as much as humans, he would act differently.

I see a crucial difference between the rights of a mere animal (such as a dog or a lab rat) and a sentient, civilized being (such as a Durlan or Gordanian or Psion). I don't hesitate to eat steak from a steer raised on a ranch out west, but I would definitely refuse to eat a "steak" carved from the body of a freshly-killed Durlan if I knew that was where it came from.

If you want to argue about speciesism, I think your case will look much stronger if you concentrate on cases where there seems to be a discrimination in the DCU between "how humans are treated" and "how other sentient beings, of similar intelligence to humans, are treated." Species which have their own spoken and written languages, religions, regular tool use, scientific research and development labs, schools, and so forth. Dragging in terrestrial animals, which are regarded by the law as "property" rather than "persons," only confuses the issue.

WorstThingUS

10-05-2009, 02:16 PM

Years ago, I pointed out that Dick Grayson (and various other Teen Titans) appeared to be using deadly force in a 1982 "New Teen Titans" story arc when they traveled to other worlds in a quest to rescue Starfire after she'd been captured by her worst enemies (the Citadel, the Gordanians, and Kori's evil sister Blackfire).

The whole thing had a certain "Star Wars" feel to it. I don't remember Dick or Wally or anyone else later giving any of their "mentors" (Bruce, Barry, etc.) detailed descriptions of what they had done to the enemies they encountered on battlefields, very far away from Earth and its laws. It is possible that Batman et al. still live in blissful ignorance regarding just how many sentient beings the Titans killed (or helped allies such as the Omega Men find opportunities to kill) in the course of that adventure.

No, as I mentioned before Marv Wolfman confirmed they killed in a war setting, but pre-crisis as it was, Batman was honest about having done so and under much less drastic circumstances. It was also pre-crisis where Barry wasn't voted out of the JLA after snapping Professor Zoom's neck, so they were a little more understanding than you think.

Vic Vega

10-05-2009, 03:17 PM

In the defense of the Pre-Crisis Batman, most of his confirmed kills are in the realm of negligent homicides (he lets the bad guy blow up in his lab instead of saving him).

Unless we are talking about some Bronze Age, Brave in the Bold Bob Haney story where Bats is machine-gunning Commies or the Viet Cong something.

Robin was cold shooting Gordainians in the dome.

Of course the Gordainians are like the Viet-Cong of Space so maybe it DOES all work out.