Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 47
  1. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mistah K88 View Post
    When it comes to R'as I must ask this... does Ra's ever get sent to a prison or something after his scheme of the day fails? I always remember him having an implied death (or escaping period).
    No, he's never been busted and captured.

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megadoomer View Post
    I sincerely doubt that. Aside from the people who survive working for the Joker (there's bound to be a few that stick around - given that he generally doesn't care about money beyond advancing his schemes, he probably pays well), there's also Harley Quinn to consider. Sure, in the current comics, she's broken up with the Joker, but if anyone actually killed him, she'd probably still hunt that person down and end them violently for doing so. Plus, if someone makes an attempt to kill the Joker and fails, they're going to get the Joker's full attention, along with their loved ones...
    Well, I was being facetious about a plot outcome we know writers will indulge, but the fallout with Harley is a good point to bring up if DC ever did go that route.

    ...As for Batman in particular killing the Joker, aside from the slippery slope argument, there's also the fact that Batman is a vigilante taking the law into his own hands, and he's the only one in Gotham who's intelligent enough to keep up with the Joker's brand of insanity. If he actually killed the Joker, it would probably be more difficult for people like Gordon to justify working with a known murderer, and the GCPD would have to do something about Bruce.
    Quote Originally Posted by RubberLotus View Post
    My thoughts on this: if Batman won't even kill Ra's al-Ghul, then people have no business expecting him to kill Joker.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vil_Dee View Post
    People need to stop applying their own moral compass on to Batman. Batman is not an average person with typical average person thoughts. Batman is an extreme idealist.
    I think people misunderstand the argument here, at least for me. I don't have any expectations that Batman will kill Joker. I don't think anyone does. We're past that threshold, we know he won't kill and have stopped caring.

    The problem is that writers keep upping and upping the level of slaughter the Joker commits, yet they'll dumb down every avenue that could/should stop a threat that's hitting national, if not global attention. All the practical elements in a story that would apply to any other villain are written to be impotent against the Joker: the courtroom, the police, the vigilantes that do kill or government sanctioned ones. The Joker has even died and we had the Bat family resuscitating him (The Last Laugh). Crazy.

    Stories like Joker: Devil's Advocate may exploit the technicalities of our laws, but at the same time, we're not going to a keep putting a genocidal killer in a facility that cannot hold him, over and over again. I would find this continued use of the Joker more acceptable if his criminal activity floated under the radar, but it doesn't. And the fact we've seen he can be caught and he can be killed, makes it evident those moments that contrive to give him a safety net.

  3. #33
    Senior Member tylenoljones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sidekick77 View Post
    No, I believe its definitely the massive body count in addition to the personal attacks that make it hard to believe the Joker's still around. He's got a body count close to genocidal levels.
    I see what you're saying, but look at jgiannantoni's example regarding Sinestro. That character has a higher body count, and no fans are screaming out that he should be dead.

    I still firmly believe that people want to see Joker dead more because of the personal nature of his attacks (and perhaps because of his popularity, as others have pointed out), regardless of the arguments they might use.

  4. #34
    Senior Member jgiannantoni05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arkham, Mass.
    Posts
    3,636

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vil_Dee View Post
    I wish one writer would just put in as canon, "Gotham doesn't have the flippin death penalty, m'kay!!!!"
    Done already. See Ventril/Scarface's origin in the old Showcase series (#8 and 9).

    People need to stop applying their own moral compass on to Batman
    I agree. That's why I keep saying that Batman is a Kantian deontologist, a fundamentally different moral system than their endlessly harped on utilitarian urgings. Your compass may be utilitarian, Batman's is not (on this issue of murder), that's his choice.

    Some utilitarians don't seem to see that there are other moral systems. Kantian deontology is a longstanding one, and it's not a consequences-of-doing-X-or-not-doing-X driven moral system.
    Last edited by jgiannantoni05; 02-03-2013 at 11:34 AM.
    DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.

  5. #35
    just does things Vil_Dee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sidekick77 View Post


    I think people misunderstand the argument here, at least for me. I don't have any expectations that Batman will kill Joker. I don't think anyone does. We're past that threshold, we know he won't kill and have stopped caring.

    The problem is that writers keep upping and upping the level of slaughter the Joker commits, yet they'll dumb down every avenue that could/should stop a threat that's hitting national, if not global attention. All the practical elements in a story that would apply to any other villain are written to be impotent against the Joker: the courtroom, the police, the vigilantes that do kill or government sanctioned ones. The Joker has even died and we had the Bat family resuscitating him (The Last Laugh). Crazy.

    Stories like Joker: Devil's Advocate may exploit the technicalities of our laws, but at the same time, we're not going to a keep putting a genocidal killer in a facility that cannot hold him, over and over again. I would find this continued use of the Joker more acceptable if his criminal activity floated under the radar, but it doesn't. And the fact we've seen he can be caught and he can be killed, makes it evident those moments that contrive to give him a safety net.
    The problem is that people don't hold any of the other villains to the same standards as the Joker. Again, Ras tries to wipe out virtually all of humanity, yet no questions as to why none of the world governments or a coalition doesn't hunt him down. The Joker is an infamous murder, but he's still a mental patient (and fwi, you can't sentence a mental patient (or even a convict) to death because they keep escaping incarceration). Ras, on the other hand, is the #1 global terrorist. So the Joker makes the GCPD and the Arkham staff look incompetent? Well Ras makes every single government in the world look incompetent. And Ras was in fact captured by Batman at the end of the Resurrection of Ras Al Ghul. Well what happened? Was there a trial? an execution? Nope. But we're not going to talk about that because not pursuing a terrorist depicted as worse and more dangerous than Bin Laden is so realistic.


    Quote Originally Posted by jgiannantoni05 View Post
    Done already. See Ventril/Scarface's origin in the old Showcase series (#8 and 9).
    Well great! Case closed.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vil_Dee View Post
    The problem is that people don't hold any of the other villains to the same standards as the Joker. Again, Ras tries to wipe out virtually all of humanity, yet no questions as to why none of the world governments or a coalition doesn't hunt him down. The Joker is an infamous murder, but he's still a mental patient (and fwi, you can't sentence a mental patient (or even a convict) to death because they keep escaping incarceration). Ras, on the other hand, is the #1 global terrorist. So the Joker makes the GCPD and the Arkham staff look incompetent? Well Ras makes every single government in the world look incompetent. And Ras was in fact captured by Batman at the end of the Resurrection of Ras Al Ghul. Well what happened? Was there a trial? an execution? Nope. But we're not going to talk about that because not pursuing a terrorist depicted as worse and more dangerous than Bin Laden is so realistic.
    You're making unequal comparisons. There is great a separation between who Ra's is as a character and the Joker, much less Ra's and Bin Laden. Ra's Al Ghul has mystical elements at his disposal, is quasi-immortal, with an impenetrable and undefined global network. Joker has none of these things, is mortal, and has seen his criminal operations broken up and brought to court.

    And sure, our judicial system is not going to sentence the mentally ill to death, but neither will they endanger the public by placing him in a compromised facility. If writers are going to keep escalating the body-count, then the idea of Arkham being an appropriate containment for Joker becomes more ridiculous.

    With every new story event, I'm amazed that the Joker--who's threat-level is almost parallel to the DEFCON nowadays--is not courting the attention of the government, a private sector group, or simply a more cutthroat vigilante. At this stage, it shouldn't rely on Batman or the GCPD to eliminate this problem. Your mention of Bin Laden is a good example of this type of intervention without trial, but I'm not trying to bring real world equations into comics. I understand fantasy and the suspension of disbelief. I just think writers have bankrupted this villain's effectiveness. DotF may be the last Joker storyline I read for a long while.

  7. #37
    Junior Member Megadoomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sidekick77 View Post
    And sure, our judicial system is not going to sentence the mentally ill to death, but neither will they endanger the public by placing him in a compromised facility. If writers are going to keep escalating the body-count, then the idea of Arkham being an appropriate containment for Joker becomes more ridiculous.
    The way I see it, if he's kept in Arkham, then his breakout attempts only create the risk of setting loose other villains that Batman can handle. Aside from people like Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, or Clayface, they're normal (albeit insane) humans. Keep in mind that Batman has years of training, a massive amount of resources, and plans for most situations, and the Joker can still do things that he won't expect and push Batman to his limits. Throwing him in a place like Slabside Penitentiary wouldn't work (and it hasn't - there was a story where the Joker had been placed in there, but when falsely informed that he had a fatal brain tumour, he broke out just as easily as he breaks out of Arkham) - he's intelligent and unpredictable enough to break out of there, and if he did, he'd be letting loose threats that are more along the lines of Flash or Superman level, people who can cause a lot more damage than Batman's rogue's gallery in a shorter period of time.

  8. #38

    Default Would joker murder babies?

    Okay hear me out. In Arkham Alsyum the video game, Oracle mentioned something about Joker and a dead baby. I think in an interview of the joker, he showed them a picture of a dead baby. In No Man's Land, Joker kidnapped a bunch of infants and held them as hostage, if I'm not mistaken. He throws one to the ground so Sarah Essen was distracted and then he killed her. Remember that. So is joker above killing infants, toddlers, etc.

  9. #39
    Sentinel of Liberty Drz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Home!
    Posts
    9,348

    Default

    Joker isn't above anything unless he feels like it. Depends on the incarnation.
    "Finally got rid of all those pesky white males that were burdening the team! Now the Ultimates are urban hipsters... what everyone demanded!" - Exciter
    My Blog

  10. #40
    The Alpha and The Omega Godlike13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Chicago,IL
    Posts
    11,747

    Default

    Would he, yes. Should they ever show the Joker killing babies, no.

  11. #41
    Member thewarning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    758

    Default

    Joker draws the line at Nazism; anything else is fair game.

  12. #42
    Hater booyah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Wherever Evil Chills
    Posts
    911

    Default

    I love these threads.

  13. #43
    Senior Member Cypher-Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,397

    Default

    Whats up with people trying to justify the level of evil here.

    The Joker isnt someone whos supposed to be that likable. Dont justify it at least. At leats acknowledge that he's a murdering scumbag and state that you like him for the humor or whatever.

    He would kill you, he would kill his friends, he would rape women, he would kill children, he doesnt care. He is a scumbag. I love how people think that he can kill tons fo people but if he kills children "hes totally evil!"

  14. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher-Z View Post
    Whats up with people trying to justify the level of evil here.

    The Joker isnt someone whos supposed to be that likable. Dont justify it at least. At leats acknowledge that he's a murdering scumbag and state that you like him for the humor or whatever.

    He would kill you, he would kill his friends, he would rape women, he would kill children, he doesnt care. He is a scumbag. I love how people think that he can kill tons fo people but if he kills children "hes totally evil!"
    If he kills normal innocent humans, it doesn't mean he would kill children. Believe it or no, there is a line between the two. For example, dr.light has killed people before he raped Sue Dibny. But just when he did, well he turned into a very evil villian. However I'm just wandering, if it meant getting at batman or being part of a big plan, if joker would kill an infant. Not because I think that it would make me like him less or more, not because I'm trying to justify his evil, and not because I'm trying to test to see if I still like him.

  15. #45

    Default

    People vilify killing children more than just being a straight up murderer but at the end of the day it's still murder.

    As said Joker draws the line at nazism, he would murder a baby for kicks. They would never show it but he would.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •