Batman, The No Killing Rule & Troubles in Fandom: (Patreon)

Hello again, 

I'm back from my holiday and decided to jump head first into controversy by discussing a commo hot topic in the DC/Bat-Clan fandom. The no killing rule and the tension that sometimes exist between various fans over it.

The tension on this issue, if oversimplified, tends to manifest in people questioning why Batman doesn't kill or allow certain villains to die and others explaining some variation of "Murder bad." 

I think though that these discussions often miss why people raise this question, so as someone who is fine with said rule but thinks its poorly executed please follow me on a journey. 

First, lets define the general reasons why Batman does not kill:

Type 1: Batman occupies a legally nebulous position and so him specifically going that far is a problem.

Type 2: Killing is wrong, he believes in restorative justice, he values all life, its not his place.

Type 3: Bruce was traumatized by the death of his parents & can't allow others to die, or he's so close to snapping one wrong move and he'll become a serial killer.

Of the above, I think there's tensions around all of these. 

Type 1, pragmatic legalism, seems like the easiest to execute but I don't think I've ever seen it done without Bruce also moralizing about it. 

To the point where he takes issue with a woman who took down a serial killer that killed her sister and was otherwise going to get off scot free, by doing nothing but being ready to defend herself. 

Sill, conceptually this is one of the easier to execute ideas and it can bleed into the others. 

Now onto type 2, killing is wrong. 

The reason people take issue with this is because it is often viewed as him being to varying degrees, hypocritical. 

Batman is after all an ally of the police who kill all the time. If he believes in restorative justice why is he often so brutal and outright cruel. Also let's be real here the American penal system is shit at reducing crime and instead tends to radicalize even none violent people when it doesn't just kill them. 

One could say its a comic and therefore not meant to totally realistic, IE the police not sucking but I find this a weak claim. These stories have always reflected a lot about the world we live in, from the prevalence and power of the mafia in the early comics to the war on drugs. 

You can't disconnect it from the material reality of police and prison systems entirely or so easily and still retain coherence. Also do you really want comics to be more copaganda like? 

Then there is Bruce valuing all life to the point of saving say the Joker. 

This isn't bad but when it gets to the point where he outright brings the Joker back from the dead or otherwise actively harms or even risks killing others to save him. Many feel it goes from being a morally sound stance to Bruce enabling Joker to keep killing. 

IE, when he slit Jason's throat to save the Joker or revived him after Dick killed him, or the other times he's brought the Joker back from the dead, yes its happened more than once somehow, The Joker would then go on to kill more people. Obviously the Joker is responsible for is own actions, but the frustration makes sense to me.

On the other hand it just not being his place is fine by me , though it can still run into bad execution as seen with the Joker examples above.

The issues with type 3 are much simpler.

Namely cos its then either Bruce enforcing his will on the world solely cos of his own undealt with trauma, often in such a way that it comes at others expense. 

See the Joker examples. 

Or its the case that Bruce is literally so dangerously close to the edge that frankly he should not be out there being Batman if him going mass murderer on everyone is such a concern.

Plus we again circle back to the previous issues.

IE, he works with a system that kills people, or ruins and destroys lives but is fine with it. 

But the thing is, that death via the cops bullet, in a cell or because your caretakers are now in prison and you starved in the street are still deaths.

Also, please, don't bring up the Wayne Foundation. Partially cos its not super relevant but always seems to get brought up in these discussions. But also because even ignoring its irrelevance here the foundations presence and usage in Batman Media s pretty wild and varied. It also cannot and does not magically address all these issues even in its best incarnations. & in its worse one's its literally doing stuff like hosting fundraisers for the police.)

Long story short, in my eyes the issue is less "Why not kill, killing easy" and more, "Given these various factors the fact Bruce doe snot kill feels incoherent, hypocritical or he does the same/similar amounts of damage regardless, or is just too dangerous to be trusted regardless."

Which I think is a much more interesting conversation to be having, if one ants to. 

Thanks for stopping by.